post pentax 645z

[david distefano]

just completed on ebay was a phase one p25+ that sold for $3000. hasselblad having a special for the h5d40. on ebay anyone who is trying to sell their phase one db from p45+ and lower or hasselblads are going unsold if their prices are a reflection of pre 645z. and it will only get worse when the camera is finally delivered. hasselblad and phase one are going to have to meet this challenge. there just aren't that many photographers who are willing to shell out an extra $20,000+ for the perceived differences. and what would stop schneider to offer lenses for the 645z if sales really take off. and the economy is not moving forward. in the last 3 years more u s businesses failed then were started. and this is during the supposed economic growth period. so photographers will be watching their money to get the best bang for their buck. imo a new p45+ back should sell at the price of $8999.00 based on the 645z price. i know though, that phase one couldn't sell at that price point, because of the r&d costs, advertising costs, etc. divided by the units sold would leave almost no room for a profit as well as losing the status symbol. interesting times are ahead.

[bcooter]

just completed on ebay was a phase one p25+ that sold for $3000. hasselblad having a special for the h5d40. on ebay anyone who is trying to sell their phase one db from p45+ and lower or hasselblads are going unsold if their prices are a reflection of pre 645z. and it will only get worse when the camera is finally delivered. hasselblad and phase one are going to have to meet this challenge. there just aren't that many photographers who are willing to shell out an extra $20,000+ for the perceived differences. and what would stop schneider to offer lenses for the 645z if sales really take off. and the economy is not moving forward. in the last 3 years more u s businesses failed then were started. and this is during the supposed economic growth period. so photographers will be watching their money to get the best bang for their buck. imo a new p45+ back should sell at the price of $8999.00 based on the 645z price. i know though, that phase one couldn't sell at that price point, because of the r&d costs, advertising costs, etc. divided by the units sold would leave almost no room for a profit as well as losing the status symbol. interesting times are ahead.

I think you miss the point.

For some that don't need a removable back, or have an investment in lenses and bodies, the Pentax might be the best move.

But for a lot of others, the Pentax isn't any more cost effective than any previous back, though granted the Phase $35,000 cmos back does seem expensive, even by 2007 standards and technology, budgets and where we show images has changed a lot since 2007.

You know, I bought the Leica S2 because of the Sony A7r.  I looked at the Sony's, what I shoot, what I need to do with a camera and since the Leica took my existing contax lenses, it was a better camera and less expensive for me to go with the Leica than start all over again with Sony.

That's kind of the way I see the Pentax.  If your starting clean sheet, don't need high sync or specialized lenses like tilt shift your good, but if you do need those other functions then the Pentax probably isn't the best deal, though I wish them well.

Still, other than price I really wouldn't call it disruptive to the market.

IMO

BC

[DanielStone]

I've been following the 645Z announcements with great interest. I'm not in a position to need one, but nonetheless, I'm still interested. I love the 645NII system for shooting film, as I've found that it's a great system, and I love the look/draw of the lenses.

P1 and Leaf/Sinar,etc. still have an advantage however, in the "niche" MF technical camera arena, with the likes of Alpa, Cambo, Horseman, Silvestri, etc. For users of those systems and lenses, a removable back is a necessity. However, I do see this 645Z becoming a very hot ticket as soon as it hits stores. As long as the tethering works well, is stable, and the files can be manipulated by capable/comparable software to P1/Leaf Capture, I'd say it's definitely "game on".

Interesting times ahead, but a camera is just that: a camera. It still takes skilled hands to make great photographs. Not just technical specs and a low price point.

just my 2¢

-Dan

[Gel]

The thing with MF cameras is they lose value FAST from new.

To me, as someone who buys his kit used I don't get hit by the $30,000 premium. I paid $8000 for my H4D50 and that was three years ago.

Still have it now, still love it and have a H1 for film use. I even use it at weddings sometimes.

[Theodoros]

I think you miss the point.

For some that don't need a removable back, or have an investment in lenses and bodies, the Pentax might be the best move.

But for a lot of others, the Pentax isn't any more cost effective than any previous back, though granted the Phase $35,000 cmos back does seem expensive, even by 2007 standards and technology, budgets and where we show images has changed a lot since 2007.

You know, I bought the Leica S2 because of the Sony A7r.  I looked at the Sony's, what I shoot, what I need to do with a camera and since the Leica took my existing contax lenses, it was a better camera and less expensive for me to go with the Leica than start all over again with Sony.

That's kind of the way I see the Pentax.  If your starting clean sheet, don't need high sync or specialized lenses like tilt shift your good, but if you do need those other functions then the Pentax probably isn't the best deal, though I wish them well.

Still, other than price I really wouldn't call it disruptive to the market.

IMO

BC

Yeah... the "Z" is one of the best DSLRs out there... isn't it? ...and it is a DSLR, ...but what if Pentax decides to sell an MFDB version of it, say for M645, H and Contax 645 mount only... What then? What if they decide on a new interchangeable back (perhaps with provision for a film back?) body, based on the "Z" (small investment) and an MFDB to support it along with some major other mounts? Surely, the back would be even less than a "Z" and the body.... Well... I do have a "dirty" mind...

[eronald]

Yeah... the "Z" is one of the best DSLRs out there... isn't it? ...and it is a DSLR, ...but what if Pentax decides to sell an MFDB version of it, say for M645, H and Contax 645 mount only... What then? What if they decide on a new interchangeable back (perhaps with provision for a film back?) body, based on the "Z" (small investment) and an MFDB to support it along with some major other mounts? Surely, the back would be even less than a "Z" and the body.... Well... I do have a "dirty" mind...

You mean to say that Pentax could saw the Z in two, and maybe even make a tech camera with shift that takes 6x7 Pentax lenses? No, that is clearly impossible. Insert reason here ...

Edmund

[Gandalf]

This thread got me thinking. Once upon a time I came very close to buying a Pentax 645NII. On paper, it was about the best camera value going. There were only two flaws. The low sync speed was one. The other was it didn't have a removable back. OK, sure you obviously could change the film, but that was a cartridge, not a back. You couldn't setup your shot, pull a couple polaroids and then switch to film. Or shoot on color and black and white at the same time. Those wound up as deal breakers for me.

Fast forward a handful of years and the Pentax 645z is the best value going in medium format and anyone who buys something else is an idiot. There are only two flaws ... . While the Pentax is a fraction of the price of a Phase, Hasselblad or Leica, it isn't necessarily a better value. The people who bought Pentax cameras in the film days were nature, landscape and wildlife photographers who wanted higher image quality than 35 mm but didn't want to deal with the hassle or cost of a view camera. It seems that little has changed. The only people the 645z makes sense for are outdoor photographers who don't use strobes, and are not willing to make the leap to tech cameras. The 645z is neither a good value nor a bad one. It is a camera with a clear market niche, and for the people in that niche, it makes a lot of sense and is a pretty reasonable compromise on all levels.

[lowep]

if you are not going to shell out big bucks for a P1 or Hasselbald rig because of the new Pentax, then why would you not just buy a cheap DSLR instead of buying the more expensive Pentax... or a P&S instead of a DSLR?

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,

I guess it expands the market.

Best regards
Erik

I think you miss the point.

For some that don't need a removable back, or have an investment in lenses and bodies, the Pentax might be the best move.

But for a lot of others, the Pentax isn't any more cost effective than any previous back, though granted the Phase $35,000 cmos back does seem expensive, even by 2007 standards and technology, budgets and where we show images has changed a lot since 2007.

You know, I bought the Leica S2 because of the Sony A7r.  I looked at the Sony's, what I shoot, what I need to do with a camera and since the Leica took my existing contax lenses, it was a better camera and less expensive for me to go with the Leica than start all over again with Sony.

That's kind of the way I see the Pentax.  If your starting clean sheet, don't need high sync or specialized lenses like tilt shift your good, but if you do need those other functions then the Pentax probably isn't the best deal, though I wish them well.

Still, other than price I really wouldn't call it disruptive to the market.

IMO

BC

[gerald.d]

This thread got me thinking. Once upon a time I came very close to buying a Pentax 645NII. On paper, it was about the best camera value going. There were only two flaws. The low sync speed was one. The other was it didn't have a removable back. OK, sure you obviously could change the film, but that was a cartridge, not a back. You couldn't setup your shot, pull a couple polaroids and then switch to film. Or shoot on color and black and white at the same time. Those wound up as deal breakers for me.

Fast forward a handful of years and the Pentax 645z is the best value going in medium format and anyone who buys something else is an idiot.

I have an IQ250. I use it on an ALPA FPS with Rodenstock and Canon lenses (from the 8-15, through the TS-E's, the 35/1.4, the /1.2's, and all the big whites - up to and including the 1200/5.6).

Since acquiring it, I've shot something in the region of 30,000 images with the back.

Even if the Pentax were available, not a single one of those images could have been taken with the camera.

Still, regardless of that, I guess that I'm still an idiot.

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,

Horses for the courses. Personally, I feel that MFD on technical cameras makes a lot of sense, especially in combination with live view.

In a sense, I would say that Pentax has a problem, in that they are compering with high end 135, and the competition may have some awesome lenses.

Best regards
Erik

I have an IQ250. I use it on an ALPA FPS with Rodenstock and Canon lenses (from the 8-15, through the TS-E's, the 35/1.4, the /1.2's, and all the big whites - up to and including the 1200/5.6).

Since acquiring it, I've shot something in the region of 30,000 images with the back.

Even if the Pentax were available, not a single one of those images could have been taken with the camera.

[synn]

I wouldn't trade my leaf shutter lenses for anything.
The Pentax could be 6k and still wouldn't be a factor for me and the work that I do.

[ErikKaffehr]

Yes,

Horses for the courses.

Personally I am never using flash for real life shots. So I am happy with FP shutter. Many MFD users use ALPA FPS or Hartblei  HCam, both use focal plane shutters, but I guess they don't use outdoor flash.

On the other hand, I am shooting wide angles and would like to be able to do Scheimpflug. I bought a Hasselblad Flexbody for immediate needs but my long term plan used to be a Hartblei HCam to be used with the Hasselblad lenses but also Canons 17 and 24 T&S lenses. Pretty much everything can be adapted to the HCam.

Best regards
Erik

I wouldn't trade my leaf shutter lenses for anything.
The Pentax could be 6k and still wouldn't be a factor for me and the work that I do.

[JoeKitchen]

Wow, this conversation is still going on. 

I thought we settled this, the Pentax is going to drive the final nail into Phase One's and Hasselblad's coffin.  But ... wait ... wasn't it ... I thought the D800e, handed down to us from Mount Olympus by Zeus himself, already put that nail in place?  Or was it the 5DII, with it's HD video, that did it?  No, it probably was the AR7, right?  Yes, that's right, the AR7 was the final coup de gras.   

[david distefano]

this was never meant to be the "final nail in the coffin for medium format digital." what i was alluding to was a realignment of prices for mfdb's, especially for s/h digital backs from p45+/leaf 40mp/ and hasselblad 40mp downward. of all the mfdb photographers, what percent used tech cameras? a small percent i would imagine and i was one of them and i loved it. how many mfdb owners or potential owners require leaf shutters? again a small number. if you require either, the product is available.  you will not stay in business unless you bring ever increasing photographers to your table. you just can't stay in business, with people already owning your product, and trading in for the newest model. that is why i believe that in the post pentax 645z era, pricing will become very important. the rich may be able to spend big bucks without blinking an eye but it is the average joe who will keep you in business. from 2011 to 2012 medium format digital backs used by professional photographers dropped from 16% to 12%, a 25% drop and price had a lot to do with it.

[Telecaster]

The main fault with these discussions is their binary nature. This is a better choice than, and thus will supersede, that. Full stop. This, of course, being my prefered gear—or at least L'Objet du Jour that's caught my eye—and that being someone else's. It doesn't match the way the world works. I suspect that if the new Pentax is genuinely successful it'll be more 'cuz it creates its own market niche and less 'cuz it makes significant inroads into an existing one. But it won't be just one or the other.

I bought my 645D because I already had the lenses, Pentax had just cut the price and I wanted a solid tripod camera that produced a big file for potential large prints (less of an interest now) and future 8k display (more of an interest). I think of it as a Canikon style camera rather than "medium format" per se. That the sensor is both larger than 135 format and smaller than 120/220 is neither here nor there.

-Dave-

[eronald]

Wow, this conversation is still going on. 

I thought we settled this, the Pentax is going to drive the final nail into Phase One's and Hasselblad's coffin.  But ... wait ... wasn't it ... I thought the D800e, handed down to us from Mount Olympus by Zeus himself, already put that nail in place?  Or was it the 5DII, with it's HD video, that did it?  No, it probably was the AR7, right?  Yes, that's right, the AR7 was the final coup de gras.   

Yeah, yeah, but digital went and killed 35mm film SLRs, 35mm point and shoots, then it killed Kodachrome, and then it went and essentially killed the film-use Hassy V and Pentax and Mamiya and Fuji and and .. cousins, diminishing the total sales of MF film to the point where it's getting really hard to buy and process. So sure, you are right we shouldn't fear progress, photography has shown that obsolete formats hang on, but they sure don't thrive.

Edmund

[Mike Sellers]

 Here is a link to a list of shift and tilt / shift lenses for the pentax  645 mount
http://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/48-pentax-645d-medium-format/182276-pentax-medium-format-third-party-resources-ii-t-s-lenses-tilt-shift-lenses.html

[Gandalf]

Still, regardless of that, I guess that I'm still an idiot.

I honestly can't tell whether you understood the point of my post out missed it completely, so I'll spell it out just in case. I have no doubt that this Pentax, just like all medium format Pentax cameras before it, is innovative and a lot of camera for the money. Still, for me persinally, and most working pros, it is not a viable tool at any price because it lacks the flexibility we need. To most of the internet elite, we are idiots because we fail to see the value in what is clearly the deal of the century. Put simply, the shoe doesn't fit.

[david distefano]

I honestly can't tell whether you understood the point of my post out missed it completely, so I'll spell it out just in case. I have no doubt that this Pentax, just like all medium format Pentax cameras before it, is innovative and a lot of camera for the money. Still, for me persinally, and most working pros, it is not a viable tool at any price because it lacks the flexibility we need. To most of the internet elite, we are idiots because we fail to see the value in what is clearly the deal of the century. Put simply, the shoe doesn't fit.

i hope you didn't think i said you were an idiot. far from it. every photographer has to pick the best tool for them to complete their task. my point is, of all mf photographers, not just pros, it is a small percentage who use tech cameras or flash sync. this is defiantly a plus for the phase one and hasselblad. but for the vast amount of photographers who may be contemplating mf digital, the pentax price point puts many more non 1%ers into the ballgame. all of this is predicated on the image that the pentax 645z delivers. if the phase one iq250 or the hasselblad h5d50c produce considerably better images then all bets are off, but if they produce minimal improvement, and that is up to each and every photographer to determine, then i believe that the pentax 645z is a game changer.