Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Medium Format / Film / Digital Backs – and Large Sensor Photography => Topic started by: ladsphotography on December 05, 2014, 10:05:20 pm
-
Based on the review in this website I rented the Pentax 645Z and two lenses the 25mm and 35mm lenses.
The results were quite bad and the images poor.
Even with live view and magnification I could not
make the image to pop and the files were soft.
I repited the images with the Sony 7R and similar focal lengths and the images were far superior.
I understand the Pentax lenses are quite variable in quality within the same focal length.
I was very disappointed with this camera system.
Anybody had similar experience?
-
Aloha,
I doubt it.
-
Even with live view and magnification I could not
make the image to pop and the files were soft.
so they have no value and you can dare to illustrate your point with a link to an actual raw file or two...
-
Hi,
It is hard to judge anything if you don't supply some images. I am no P645Z user, but I still have some suggestions.
Some things to keep in mind:
- Significant sharpening is needed on any image. Optimal sharpening may be different from your previous system.
- Looking at actual pixels you see the pixels but not the image quality. Let's say you shoot same image 36 MP and 50 MP, using the same lens under same condition. The 50 MP image will look softer at actual pixels but will have the better image quality in real life. The reason is that magnification is different.
- Is your technique optimal? Do you use mirror lock up and cable release/self timer?
Lloyd Chambers has a lot of examples with many of the Pentax 645 lenses shot on Pentax 645D and a few on the Pentax 645Z. His observations may be a bit mixed. He did compare the 25 mm lens on the Pentax 645Z with a Zeiss Distagon 21/2.8 on the Sony A7r, and generally found that the A7r was delivering best detail in that case.
http://diglloyd.com/index-dap.html#Pentax645Lenses
http://diglloyd.com/prem/prot/DAP/Pentax645Z/645Z-25mm-vs-SonyA7R-21mm.html
Now, Lloyd may be a bit excessive in his conclusions and is quite a bit oriented towards shooting large apertures. He also has very high standard of reference having or having used some of the best lenses ever made.
A gentleman over at GetDPI posted a description including many of the Pentax 645 lenses:
http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/medium-format-systems-digital-backs/35577-comprehensive-testing-results-observations-pentax-645-lenses-used-645d.html
This thread discusses lenses for the Pentax 645Z and it seems most owners are quite happy:
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?topic=94845.0
As a side remark, I have been shooting old Hasselblad lenses with a P45+. In the beginning I was not that impressed by those lenses but now days I am quite impressed with the very same lenses. Don't know why.
Best regards
Erik
-
I'm not surprised. My results with the 25mm have been awful too. I haven't made a satisfactory frame with it yet - on two copies. No idea why.
The 35mm is more surprising. Every copy I've worked with has been nice and sharp - especially in the f8-16 range.
I would stick to regular AF for most purposes - not manual with LV, as the LV kind of sucks, as I've said before. Magnifying with it is unsatisfying, and especially with the wide-angle lenses it remains hard to see much detail because the detail tends to be so far away.
I, on the other hand, was looking at some studio shots off the "Z" , shot with the 120mm last night, and was again staggered by the detail, which does translated into very nice tone if processed right.
But if you are happy with your Sony, stick with it. Not that many people really need 645 over FF 35mm.
- N.
-
I took a few shots with the 645z in-store at Samy's Camera in LA. It was a tad dark inside so I bumped the iso and shot about a dozen hand held pics with the available light. When I got to my office I took a look at them on my computer and was impressed with the clarity and the ability to pull detail out of the shadows. To get hand-held shots in that lighting gave me confidence that this is an excellent camera to have in my bag.
-
If you had trouble with both lenses, it seems (excluding operator error) that there may be an issue with the body. I would contact the rental agency, inform them of your results and ask for another body to try.
-
The results were quite bad and the images poor.
Even with live view and magnification I could not
make the image to pop and the files were soft.
I have made the same experience with the 645z. Have also compared with the Leica S and these are worlds. The 645z pictures always poor and the image does newer pop as you mentioned. Yes maybe the 645z is a "cheap" medium format camera but unfortunately the picture quality is cheap too. All these technical features are for nothing if you can't achieve some sort of quality.
-
I have made the same experience with the 645z. Have also compared with the Leica S and these are worlds. The 645z pictures always poor and the image does newer pop as you mentioned. Yes maybe the 645z is a "cheap" medium format camera but unfortunately the picture quality is cheap too. All these technical features are for nothing if you can't achieve some sort of quality.
I would suggest that there is more to this issue than meets the eye.
If a photographer of the stature of Michael Reichmann has adopted the 645z when IQ is such a critical factor to the man then this fact alone should give one pause for thought.
Just saying...
Tony Jay
-
Strange, the results I have seen from the 645Z were absolutely stunning, but I am not sure what lenses were used.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
I have owned Contax, Hasselblad and Mamiya/Phase One cameras and lens systems over the years.
I have owned and shot with the P25, P45, IQ 180, and tested most other Phase and Hassy backs. I have also worked with the Leica S2.
In my opinion the Pentax 645z not just meets the others in terms of image quality, but surpasses most of them. It's hands-down a more user oriented camera than any of them, except the Leica S.
Leica S lenses are no doubt superb, as are some of the new Phase / Schenieders. But The six Pentax lenses that I own are excellent, and for real world photography (not lab tests or pixel peeping) they are generally excellent and a joy to use.
If one is a measurer, then arguments can be made. If one is a photographer, then I'll stack the Pentax 645z and its lens line up against anything on the market.... and if price is taken into consideration then there's a mid-range Mercedes or BMW in-between putting together a Phase One or S Leica system and one from Pentax.
As for the picture quality being "cheep", I'll be polite and simply call bullshit.
I'll take the Pentax + a fine car, thank you very much.
Michael
-
I have owned Contax, Hasselblad and Mamiya/Phase One cameras and lens systems over the years.
I have owned and shot with the P25, P45, IQ 180, and tested most other Phase and Hassy backs. I have also worked with the Leica S2.
In my opinion the Pentax 645z not just meets the others in terms of image quality, but surpasses most of them. It's hands-down a more user oriented camera than any of them, except the Leica S.
Leica S lenses are no doubt superb, as are some of the new Phase / Schenieders. But The six Pentax lenses that I own are excellent, and for real world photography (not lab tests or pixel peeping) they are generally excellent and a joy to use.
If one is a measurer, then arguments can be made. If one is a photographer, then I'll stack the Pentax 645z and its lens line up against anything on the market.... and if price is taken into consideration then there's a mid-range Mercedes or BMW in-between putting together a Phase One or S Leica system and one from Pentax.
As for the picture quality being "cheep", I'll be polite and simply call bullshit.
I'll take the Pentax + a fine car, thank you very much.
Michael
Exactly. The posts bashing the 645z are very suspect given that they were made by members with just a handful of posts. Maybe hired guns by the big MFD MFGs? Humm. All in good fun.
-
Exactly. The posts bashing the 645z are very suspect given that they were made by members with just a handful of posts. Maybe hired guns by the big MFD MFGs? Humm. All in good fun.
It does make one wonder. Some criticisms of the Pentax are so extreme and contrary to most reports as to call into question their credibility.
-
Maybe hired guns by the big MFD MFGs? Humm.
LOL...
... and certainly you are a shareholder defending your brand
-
I have not had the opportunity to test as many cameras as this (nor do I want to) but am convinced that the arguments are about details that in the end will not be noticed by most consumers of photography.
I use a wide variety of cameras and formats (its a disease :)) from APS-C up through MFDB with a tech cam, all for my non-professional enjoyment and creative fulfillment. The highest resolution and sharpest setup is not necessarily, or even most of the time, the aesthetic that I want. But then sometimes it is when I'm after what Mark Dubovoy has called "hyperreality" in a LuLa article.
The price of "hyper-reality" is coming down and pressuring the market down as well as evidenced by recent Leaf Credo promotions and Phase One promos.
Thats all good. Now we aren't shut out (financially) from obtaining that high res aesthetic, but the Nikon D8xx users have been saying that for years even though as it turns out high res is not the end all and be all we once thought it was at the beginning of the digital revolution.
The technology and financial barriers are coming down and once again we are left with creating photographs. :) :) Now, how great is that!
I have owned Contax, Hasselblad and Mamiya/Phase One cameras and lens systems over the years.
I have owned and shot with the P25, P45, IQ 180, and tested most other Phase and Hassy backs. I have also worked with the Leica S2.
In my opinion the Pentax 645z not just meets the others in terms of image quality, but surpasses most of them. It's hands-down a more user oriented camera than any of them, except the Leica S.
Leica S lenses are no doubt superb, as are some of the new Phase / Schenieders. But The six Pentax lenses that I own are excellent, and for real world photography (not lab tests or pixel peeping) they are generally excellent and a joy to use.
If one is a measurer, then arguments can be made. If one is a photographer, then I'll stack the Pentax 645z and its lens line up against anything on the market.... and if price is taken into consideration then there's a mid-range Mercedes or BMW in-between putting together a Phase One or S Leica system and one from Pentax.
As for the picture quality being "cheep", I'll be polite and simply call bullshit.
I'll take the Pentax + a fine car, thank you very much.
Michael
-
The price of "hyper-reality" is coming down and pressuring the market down as well as evidenced by recent Leaf Credo promotions and Phase One promos.
Thats all good. Now we aren't shut out (financially) from obtaining that high res aesthetic, but the Nikon D8xx users have been saying that for years even though as it turns out high res is not the end all and be all we once thought it was at the beginning of the digital revolution.
The technology and financial barriers are coming down and once again we are left with creating photographs. :) :) Now, how great is that!
Just adding to the above-mentioned promotions that Hasselblad is also selling the H5D-40 now for $9,995:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/893188-REG/Hasselblad_H5D_40_DSLR_Camera.html
-
It does make one wonder. Some criticisms of the Pentax are so extreme and contrary to most reports as to call into question their credibility.
I had the very same thought!
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Michael,
I'm an h5x owner and finally got to play with the Pentax yesterday for a few hours. I found the LCD and sensor amazing, but could not imagine shooting handheld for any length of time with it, it struck me as bulky and awkward ergonomically. Especially compared with my nikons and the hasselblad.
-doug
-
I had the very same thought!
Cheers,
Bernard
I feel if you post a criticism of a legitimate product and you don't follow up with further posts, that leads most - myself included - to assume the initial solitary post may lack credibility. Especially when the number of posts from that user is very low...
Not saying this is the case here, but IMO it is incumbent upon the poster to further elucidate, otherwise suffer the skepticism over their post.
Steve Hendrix
Capture Integration
-
Michael,
I'm an h5x owner and finally got to play with the Pentax yesterday for a few hours. I found the LCD and sensor amazing, but could not imagine shooting handheld for any length of time with it, it struck me as bulky and awkward ergonomically. Especially compared with my nikons and the hasselblad.
-doug
Doug,
It's a very different animal than a H5. More of a DSLR in steroids than a medium format design. This has pros and cons.
Michael
-
Agree completely.
-
I'm not sure I get this at all. Having used (and liked) an H4 extensively in the past year, I find the "Z" much more ergonomic than the Hasselblad. It's not light, but probably lighter than the H5X sans lens, and definitely lighter with a lens, since the HC glass is massive.
The "H" has advantages over the "Z": better VF, leaf shutters, and Truefocus. But to me, ergonomics is definitely not one of them.
- N.
-
That's really interesting. In the few hours I used it, the Z felt awkward and bulky, while the H5X (and my old H1) are a joy to use and hold.
-Doug
-
I really like the handling of the Pentax. It is like a typical SLR but with a huge mirrorbox. ;D Anyone can basically pick it up and start using it right away. With the Hasselblad H cameras that is not the case. The Hassy is a Hybrid Film/Digital camera so it obviously is modular which is awesome but offers just a small dot matrix lcd on the grip to see all settings instead of the knobs / buttons + awesome rear color lcd in Pentax. But once one is used to the Hassy it feels very good in hand and works very well. I really like mine.
-
..................(and my old H1) are a joy to use and hold.
-Doug
I tried a Sigma Quattro and it felt most comfortable to me upside down and pointing towards me, yet some people like the shape. Certainly the feel of a camera is a personal response. I've used, and liked, a Pentax 645 and 645N; the 645D seemed a natural evolution, I wonder if part of your response is familiarity?
Tom
-
Some people seem to want a camera to be enjoyable in use, for others the tool is just a necessary stepping stone to the image ...
Edmund
-
Some people seem to want a camera to be enjoyable in use, for others the tool is just a necessary stepping stone to the image ...
I think there is a little bit more to it than that.
I find a nikon J1 very enjoyable to use since it has basially only a shutter release, but it is not as effective as a picture capturing device as, say, my d810, where each necessary command has a physical dial associated to it.
From what I remember of my H1 days, and from what I have seen playing with the 645Z, they are both closer to the d810, but the Pentax is ahead in terms of providing a physical control, mostly very well located, for each important camera function. The slightly more streamlines H UI may make it a bit more enjoyable to use, but I find the 645Z to be more effective.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Bernard,
We should count ourselves lucky that we now have as different beasts as the Pentax, new Hassy, old Hassy, Leica S, Phase-Alpa, and even Rollei Hy6 available, each good examples of their own working style. Wonderful times. :)
Edmund
I think there is a little bit more to it than that.
I find a nikon J1 very enjoyable to use since it has basially only a shutter release, but it is not as effective as a picture capturing device as, say, my d810, where each necessary command has a physical dial associated to it.
From what I remember of my H1 days, and from what I have seen playing with the 645Z, they are both closer to the d810, but the Pentax is ahead in terms of providing a physical control, mostly very well located, for each important camera function. The slightly more streamlines H UI may make it a bit more enjoyable to use, but I find the 645Z to be more effective.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
I tried a Sigma Quattro and it felt most comfortable to me upside down and pointing towards me, yet some people like the shape. Certainly the feel of a camera is a personal response. I've used, and liked, a Pentax 645 and 645N; the 645D seemed a natural evolution, I wonder if part of your response is familiarity?
Tom
Haa!!! Do not speak about Sigma Quattro here please. Those cameras are such a faillure that I almost sold my Audi because of the name.
-
Sure, familiarity absolutely plays a role. I've had the H1 and 5X for almost a year now, which obviously doesn't compete with a few hours. But I remember the first time I held a Nikon D3, and it just fit in the hand and got out of your way so you could make photos. Then when I bought the H1, there was a similar feeling, I didn't get anything close to that with the Pentax, and found my fingers stretching for buttons awkwardly.
-Doug
-
Haa!!! Do not speak about Sigma Quattro here please. Those cameras are such a faillure that I almost sold my Audi because of the name.
LOL. Nonetheless, the Quattro convinced me to buy a DP2.
-
Existing Pentax customers already live with the ergonomics, quite a few japanese don't care as they just want a tripod landscape camera, for slow slow use. Pentax have a lucrative domestic market, including retirees, with a domestic pricepoint of $6K, and they are right to start by serving it.
I don't think Hassy see Pentax as much of a threat in Europe and the US, with the Pentax and H5D40 prices now roughly equal, and each body having advantages - better ergonomics and central shutter on the Hassy, better sensor and liveview on the Pentax. In fact, Hassy can easily defend themselves further by just lowering the price of the H5D50C by 30% or so. I don't think Hassy are frightened of Pentax. Nor are Leica, who have a fairly unique offering and stellar lenses.
Edmund
-
That's really interesting. In the few hours I used it, the Z felt awkward and bulky, while the H5X (and my old H1) are a joy to use and hold.
-Doug
Illustrating perfectly why the "right" camera for each photographer has so much more to it than spec sheets and brick walls. They have to feel rightin your hand.
- N.
-
Some people seem to want a camera to be enjoyable in use, for others the tool is just a necessary stepping stone to the image ...
Edmund
A completely false distinction. Without joy in the tool there is no worthwhile image.
-
A completely false distinction. Without joy in the tool there is no worthwhile image.
So many people here explained to me at some point that leading brand XXXX MF camera bodies are more than good enough, and my frustration personal, that I ended up understanding that for a great many photographers the camera is just a cold inert tool, and their view is that you can use any log to make a fire, provided you bring your own skill to bear.
Frankly, as usability goes, the camera I have liked using most is the iPad, perfect viewfinder, you see what you get, and get what you see. It is no surprise that it is made by a company that lived or died by print WYSIWYG and desktop publishing for many years. Not the best images, but a great user experience. I have owned a great many cameras, but I find it interesting that the most ergonomic one is a function of an object that I only accidentally realized contains a camera and storage that can feed its display.
In the end, I think I should thank Synn because reflecting on his posts has taught me that for me as a mediocre photographer it will require exactly the same energy to take a few thousand pictures a year with a mediocre camera and postprocess them, as it would take to locate a better but still affordable solution.
I guess I should thank Erik for reminding me that if you push a fractal object of nature through any imaging system, at some scale the image will surely break.
Also, I guess I should thank the artist who posts by the name of Cooter for helping me realize that it is mostly easier to just think of the image and invent a look and redo color to made-up taste in post, rather than to measure color over and over again and try to force a profile through software that fights you at every step.
And finally, on contemplating my own prints on the wall, I have realized that if you fail to get the pictures you want, you can still live with the ones you did get. For that realization, I guess I should thank Father Time ;D
Edmund
-
Based on the review in this website I rented the Pentax 645Z and two lenses the 25mm and 35mm lenses.
The results were quite bad and the images poor.
say what? your only other posts in here suggest you may be an Olympus 4/3rds shooter. Coming from that sensor, you should be in awe of the increased detail. Since you never posted an example, I'll conclude this was a troll post.
-
Edmond; seeing as how over the years I have seen your posts I tend to mostly agree with your outlook on photography I will turn to you for recommendations for a landscape lens for the 645Z. Coming from film with a Speedgraphic and a Mamiya C330 to a 1DS3 and than to a D800E I still can't replicate the look of MF & LF that suits me in a price range that I can afford. I hope the next step to a 645Z will finally satisfy me.
Regards
Paul
-
I'm not sure I get this at all. Having used (and liked) an H4 extensively in the past year, I find the "Z" much more ergonomic than the Hasselblad. It's not light, but probably lighter than the H5X sans lens, and definitely lighter with a lens, since the HC glass is massive.
The "H" has advantages over the "Z": better VF, leaf shutters, and Truefocus. But to me, ergonomics is definitely not one of them.
- N.
Having owned the 645D and still using the H1 I agree. Like Michael said the Pentax 645D/Z is a DSLR on steroids. The grip feels like a typical DSLR grip it is just much deeper. I prefer the H viewfinder but the Pentax's is good and obviously the Pentax's displays more info and the display is easier to see. The H body grip is not bad it is just that lcd display is not too nice and the control buttons are tiny except the shutter. The H lenses are big and somewhat heavy but most are superb. I really love the look and sharpness wide open of the 80mm and the 150. The leafshutters are VERY useful to me since I work with flash but for those who don't the focal plane shutter of the Pentax offers higher shutter speeds.
It is obvious that they are VERY different systems.
Generally if you own and use 35mm DSLRs and just want more resolution and higher image quality and can live with the more limited lens selection (specially on the very wide end and of course the very long teles) the Pentax 645z is a pretty straightforward upgrade.
If you love to work at the extremes of the 35mm system, either using extreme wide angles, super teles and wide apertures for very shallow DOF then there are better options and you will feel limited by the 645z system.
-
Edmond; seeing as how over the years I have seen your posts I tend to mostly agree with your outlook on photography I will turn to you for recommendations for a landscape lens for the 645Z. Coming from film with a Speedgraphic and a Mamiya C330 to a 1DS3 and than to a D800E I still can't replicate the look of MF & LF that suits me in a price range that I can afford. I hope the next step to a 645Z will finally satisfy me.
Regards
Paul
Paul -
I really have no idea, since all my own attempts at landscape images over the years have failed to satisfy me; I think I lack both the perception and technique for landscape.
I have seen superb landscape shots here, from many talented and technically gifted landscape photographers, and I am sure they will assist you any way they can. One such who has a presence here is Hans Kruse, whose compositions and colors have amazed me.
You might also message Michael himself, he owns a 645Z which he uses for landscape, I believe, has made images I admire and has a way of quickly cutting through bs. with concise good-enough advice.
Edmund
-
Thanks for the reply Edmond. Maybe one of the landscape photographers here will chime in with some advice.
-
here are a coouple of threads on Pentax 645/67 lenses for the 645Z
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?topic=94845.0
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?topic=69996.0
-
Michael,
I'm an h5x owner and finally got to play with the Pentax yesterday for a few hours. I found the LCD and sensor amazing, but could not imagine shooting handheld for any length of time with it, it struck me as bulky and awkward ergonomically. Especially compared with my nikons and the hasselblad.
-doug
The Pentax is I believe marketed mainly as a landscape camera in Japan. If I remember rightly, it even comes with an extra vertical-position tripod socket which does indicate an affinity for use on a tripod :)
All the MF cameras seem a bit more kludgy than they would need to be. Maybe with liveview now in the picture it is time for mirroless MF :)
Edmund
-
What do you need to know? The 645z rocks. Buy the focal lengths you need for your kind of work. If you're running on the cheap, the old "A" lenses are mostly excellent, cost nothing, and can be used for landscape with liveview. At f8-14 you won't be giving up anything.
That said, the FA 45-85 is a really good lens, and not expensive.
- N.
-
Hi Edmund,
We have had mirrorless MFD for long, technical cameras. Now we have live view we have more options.
On the other hand, I would say that we need an integrated camera. The Alpa FPS and the Hartblei HCam come pretty close. Could be they need som effort to work well with live view.
Best regards
Erik
All the MF cameras seem a bit more kludgy than they would need to be. Maybe with liveview now in the picture it is time for mirroless MF :)
Edmund
-
Hi Edmund,
We have had mirrorless MFD for long, technical cameras. Now we have live view we have more options.
On the other hand, I would say that we need an integrated camera. The Alpa FPS and the Hartblei HCam come pretty close. Could be they need som effort to work well with live view.
Best regards
Erik
I think what he means is something akin to the Fuji X-T1 but with the Sony 50mp 33x44mm sensor. Well, at least that is what I would want. ;D
-
I think what he means is something akin to the Fuji X-T1 but with the Sony 50mp 33x44mm sensor. Well, at least that is what I would want. ;D
I just meant smaller, less voluminous - those are objective criteria. In fact an Alpa or Arca with AF and an EVF would be quite neat in my book. Note that on-sensor AF is now possible as well as EVFs with modern sensor designs, and even without focus pixels as demonstrated by the GH4; of course it remains to be seen how AF actuation can work, but I'm sure Alpa or Arca could design a motorized focus helical or backplane.
For myself, I'd be very happy with a $1500 superflat Plaubel Makina or all digital Fuji folder. I don't think a rear screen is really necessary if you have an EVF, and one can always use wifi on an ipad to compose on a really big screen.
But if Ken R got his super Fuji-T made, I'd love getting one in the post :)
Edmund
-
What do you need to know? The 645z rocks.
...
- N.
and there it is.
-
Hi,
It goes deeper than that.
The way I see it, SLR technology was invented to give "what you see is what you get" information in the viewfinder. Now, we can use the actual sensor signal to create the preview image, so the reflex in the SLR is not any longer needed.
But, to make best use of live view, we need Electronic First Curtain Shutter. If we don't have that we need to close a mechanical shutter before exposure, reset the sensor and fire the shutter.
I feel that integration is necessary that camera/back can control shutter and may be even aperture. There should be an option for EFCS.
With leaf shutters I would say the situation is a bit different. It seems that they can cycle fast enough with little vibrations.
Best regards
Erik
I just meant smaller, less voluminous - those are objective criteria. In fact an Alpa or Arca with AF and an EVF would be quite neat in my book. Note that on-sensor AF is now possible as well as EVFs with modern sensor designs, and even without focus pixels as demonstrated by the GH4; of course it remains to be seen how AF actuation can work, but I'm sure Alpa or Arca could design a motorized focus helical or backplane.
For myself, I'd be very happy with a $1500 superflat Plaubel Makina or all digital Fuji folder. I don't think a rear screen is really necessary if you have an EVF, and one can always use wifi on an ipad to compose on a really big screen.
But if Ken R got his super Fuji-T made, I'd love getting one in the post :)
Edmund
-
Aloha,
I regards to the lens quality of pentax.
Thanks Michael for making it clear.
I have been using the 35mm for years on the 645D
It is an excellent lens, Although it's definately starting to show its age...
I have had the new 25mm for a few weeks and can honestly say it is better in all respects to the 35mm
In the field.
The slide in cpl behind the lens elements is really a nice touch and resolves one major problem of vinetting in a wide angle lens.
The focus is quick and accurate.
The lens stopped down is very sharp throughout and has solid color and contrast.
The weather sealing appears to be effective as I nearly got washed off the rocks while shooting 40 foot waves at Waimea Bay, both the camrea and lens were submerged briefly, and the camera never missed a beat.
I can't wait to put this lens on a new Z body!
-
The weather sealing appears to be effective as I nearly got washed off the rocks while shooting 40 foot waves at Waimea Bay, both the camrea and lens were submerged briefly, and the camera never missed a beat.
Sounds cool, I have been willing to visit North shore in winter for years, but never got the opportunity.
Any images you'd be willing to share to make me drool a bit more? ;)
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Aloha,
Unfortunately no....
The camera and lens never missed a beat, but I did and all the gear in my still open waterproof bag did.
So after scrambling off the rocks with a now full of water; waterproof bag, I went and dried everything off
Everything but the 400mm was fine.
I had watched the spot on the rocks for half an hour and it seemed dry, of course as soon as I set my tripod down and unzipped my bag and took the camera out a wave buried the entire rock ledge. That was my first location of the day, after loosing my 400mm I didn't have the heart/inspiration to continue.
It's still early in the season I'll just wait for the next big swell I already have a pretty good compulsion and shooting time worked out.....
-
Aloha,
Unfortunately no....
The camera and lens never missed a beat, but I did and all the gear in my still open waterproof bag did.
So after scrambling off the rocks with a now full of water; waterproof bag, I went and dried everything off
Everything but the 400mm was fine.
I had watched the spot on the rocks for half an hour and it seemed dry, of course as soon as I set my tripod down and unzipped my bag and took the camera out a wave buried the entire rock ledge. That was my first location of the day, after loosing my 400mm I didn't have the heart/inspiration to continue.
It's still early in the season I'll just wait for the next big swell I already have a pretty good compulsion and shooting time worked out.....
so sorry to hear about your 400 :'(
-
hi all, i am new to 645z. Last week, i got a FA35 and i was so disappointed, it didn't look sharp at all (the other lenses i have are 55/75/90). I did the lens microadjustment and mounted on tripod to shoot with mirror lockup, it was strange that some part of the images were like blurry. I have returned my lens to the shop, but I noticed my friend's FA35 is not sharp too. (he had 2, on 645d and 645z)
My standard of acceptable sharpness is like 55 or 75. While I heard a lot of fellows love FA35, i am curious of the others' lenses quality.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/rhll1ewipsqjdio/ISSA0333.jpg?dl=0 (https://www.dropbox.com/s/rhll1ewipsqjdio/ISSA0333.jpg?dl=0)
Here is the link from the FA35 that I have returned, mirror locked up and shoot on live-view, on Gitzo 1228 and markins M10, from my office opened window.No wind, weather wasn't too clear. But my other lenses were def. much sharper.
i will be very glad if you can help me about this. I am unsure of getting another copy and even think to get 33-55 as well. I don't shoot landscape much, but I need a wider lens for my jobs (I do professional fashion photography), however the sharpness from the 35 was much worse then my sigma zoom on 5D even on close to mid distance.
Thanks and have a good day!
-
Paul -
I really have no idea, since all my own attempts at landscape images over the years have failed to satisfy me; I think I lack both the perception and technique for landscape.
I have seen superb landscape shots here, from many talented and technically gifted landscape photographers, and I am sure they will assist you any way they can. One such who has a presence here is Hans Kruse, whose compositions and colors have amazed me.
You might also message Michael himself, he owns a 645Z which he uses for landscape, I believe, has made images I admire and has a way of quickly cutting through bs. with concise good-enough advice.
Edmund
Thanks very much Edmund for the roses ;D I have been shooting landscape using Canon 10D, 20D, 5D, 1Ds III and 5D III, Nikon D800E, D810 and Phase One IQ160 and I would simply say that for any of them the post processing has been critical to what I would get. More important than any camera is, of course, composition and even as important find the locations, the spots, the patience for the weather and maybe a sense of where the next magical moment will be. I have seen huge differences between these cameras in technical detail, dynamic range, useability, reliability, etc. But I have good shots from all of them. Mostly because I have been at the right place at the lucky moment. I found the Phase One IQ160 overpriced and not worth the money for my use. I could get equally good results with a lesser camera although with less resolution from a single exposure. I cannot subscribe to the socalled MF look. I simply don't see it.
-
Hi,
Pretty much what I see with my Hasselblad 555/P45+ combo. The resolution advantage is clearly there. The Hasselblad also suits my shooting style when I am in landscape mode. But, I don't see that MFD advantage.
The points Hans makes are very valid, IMHO.
Best regards
Erik
...
I have been shooting landscape using Canon 10D, 20D, 5D, 1Ds III and 5D III, Nikon D800E, D810 and Phase One IQ160 and I would simply say that for any of them the post processing has been critical to what I would get. More important than any camera is, of course, composition and even as important find the locations, the spots, the patience for the weather and maybe a sense of where the next magical moment will be. I have seen huge differences between these cameras in technical detail, dynamic range, useability, reliability, etc. But I have good shots from all of them. Mostly because I have been at the right place at the lucky moment. I found the Phase One IQ160 overpriced and not worth the money for my use. I could get equally good results with a lesser camera although with less resolution from a single exposure. I cannot subscribe to the socalled MF look. I simply don't see it.
-
hi all, i am new to 645z. Last week, i got a FA35 and i was so disappointed
Could the compression of JPEG be playing a part here? Part of it's function is to reduce variation and so will blur detail. Perhaps when checking the sharpness of a lens to the detail you are it might be better to review an uncompressed image. There's patches of dirt and variation in grouting that will muddy things in odd patches too.
-
hi, all the raws are showing the same characteristic, even at close range, that's why i felt the lens was defective. I am curious to see if it was just this lens or a common issue. I only shoot raws and pocessed in Lightroom which don't offer any stablizations.
I used to own Leica S2 and H4D-50, this sharpness is not up to 135 format standard I will say. Maybe just this copy i guess. Thanks!
-
This reviewer talks about a "blur zone" that he's noticed with the FA 35mm. Sounds like you've found the same issue.
"This very popular lens is an excellent performer under most but not all shooting conditions. It’s performance varies greatly depending on subject distance, f-stop employed and whether the subject is greatly affected by the extensive spherical curvature this lens exhibits primarily at long camera to subject distances. I tested out more samples of this lens (greater than 10), than any other FA lens.
...
One sometime strange observation I’ve observed with this lens is what I’ll refer to as a 'blur zone'..."
His conclusion though is that it is a very fine lens, better at close and mid range.
http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/medium-format-systems-digital-backs/35577-comprehensive-testing-results-observations-pentax-645-lenses-used-645d.html
-
You got a bum lens. Sorry - that's so frustrating. Replace it and move on. The best I can tell you is that the vast majority of experiences I have had or have heard of with this lens (and the A version) are very positive.
Good luck.
- N.