rumor: Pentax 645D Price: $6500 USD

[Quentin]

It would be great if Phase One were to respond with an updated version of the Mamiya ZD camera body

with similar features as Pentax 645D.

Yes, the ZD camera handles well and gets closer to a scaled-up dslr in design terms than the Pentax 645D does.  A ZD MkII with a new 40mp+ sensor, Phase tweaked elctronics and software, and a much better rear screen would be good.  The ZD camera was a pioneering design.  Unfortunately it looks like Mamiya have other ideas as they have announced the more traditionaly designed DM40

Quentin

[lisa_r]

Those videos are very helpful.  This thing looks very interesting! And not too large to hand hold. Just that extra tripod mount on the side makes it look like someone at Pentax is trying to solve real issues. To have this camera plus the 5D2 as a video/backup for a total of less $$ than many of the competitors' offerings is very tempting indeed. And the lenses are cheap, correct?

[JeffKohn]

I also don't think that a camera LCD will display critical focus at these distances accurate enough.

Speaking only for the late-model Nikon's that I have experience with, the 900k-dot LCD's with the ability to zoom in to 100% pixel view (actually 200% is also supported) is quite effective for critical focusing, even with wide-angle lenses.  I can't imagine a split-image viewfinder being better, at least not on a DSLR where even with full-frame the viewfinder just isn't that big.

[vandevanterSH]

I can't imagine a split-image viewfinder being better, at least not on a DSLR where even with full-frame the viewfinder just isn't that big.
***********
I can't either...my comparison is a 203FE Hasselblad, digital back, with a very large (5cm X 5cm), bright,  split image focusing screen with as 5.5 x mag hood vs Nikon live view....the live view,  at full zoom,  is more "certain" and accurate, IMHO.

Steve

[bcooter]

I can't imagine a split-image viewfinder being better, at least not on a DSLR where even with full-frame the viewfinder just isn't that big.
***********
I can't either...my comparison is a 203FE Hasselblad, digital back, with a very large (5cm X 5cm), bright,  split image focusing screen with as 5.5 x mag hood vs Nikon live view....the live view,  at full zoom,  is more "certain" and accurate, IMHO.

Steve

I don't believe anyone doubts that eventually we'll have mirrorless professional cameras and view lcd's or evils as they call them, instead of ground plastic.

Some ways I look forward to it, other ways I don't, but that's going to be the direction, (especially as video seems to be added to every camera) and if anything hurts the Pentax (other than they haven't announced it's sale world wide), it's the fact that their brand of lcd won't do live view.

The Upside to the Pentax really is the price and the usability, because if it does what it looks like it will do then it's a medium format look (which I attribute mostly to no AA filter) with a Canon/Nikon type of usability.


IMO

BC

[vandevanterSH]

it's the fact that their brand of lcd won't do live view.
*********
I think the issue is CCD vs CMOS and live view.  Does any camera with CCD sensor offer live view?

Steve

[pcunite]

it's the fact that their brand of lcd won't do live view.
*********
I think the issue is CCD vs CMOS and live view.  Does any camera with CCD sensor offer live view?

Steve

I think the answer is no, the fact that Pentax threw everything in including the kitchen sink (a leveling indicator! for real?! sweet!) and LiveView was not included proves that. This Pentax 645D is everything I thought the Lecia S2 would be, a camera for people who want a nice body.

[feppe]

This Pentax 645D is everything I thought the Lecia S2 would be, a camera for people who want a nice body.

It comes with a gym membership? The Pentax really does come with everything!

[bcooter]

it's the fact that their brand of lcd won't do live view.
*********
I think the issue is CCD vs CMOS and live view.  Does any camera with CCD sensor offer live view?

Steve

Uh yea, well that's what I mean but lcd ccd whatever, it won't do liveview on the back of the camera.

At least what it will do is have a processed preview that you can view at 100% without scaring yourself.

BC

[tho_mas]

I can't imagine a split-image viewfinder being better, at least not on a DSLR where even with full-frame the viewfinder just isn't that big.

I don't know if it is "better". I only know that I have yet to miss focus at the distances I was talking about.

[pschefz]

That is a great question, especially for photographers shooting people, aka fashion or advertising with people.
I answer the question for myself a while ago, since my phase camera and back are sitting in the shelf most of the times and the 24mp dslr get 90% of the work.
Last week I shot one of 12 pages editorial for a fashion magazine, about 1000 captures. My assistant and I did not find one file that was out of focus enough for not being able of using the pic, I would say I had a 95% rate of tack sharp and a 5% of in focus but not sharp. On most of the shots the girl was moving back and forth and jumping too.
Forget to have a nearly 100% sucesful rate with any of the current MF, and that include H and Leica.

So to answer our question, how much is worth a 40mp image slightly OOF? Nothing.

If this Pentax has an AF that is half as good as its DSLR ( I cannot see why not?) it is definitively worth looking at.

same here.....i don't have to do a "focus edit" anymore....or pray that that perfect shot has sharp eyes......instead of nose or ears....it is also much easier to rescue a borderline shot from DSLR then from DMF.....and nobody asks for a 30 or 40 or 50mpix image.....but they do like them in focus....

came across this on the stockland martel blog....the kate spade shoot...typical situation where nobody would have even considered DSLR a couple of years ago.....today they actually list the 5DII like they are proud of it......a shoot like that would easily have a bigger camera rental budget then the purchase price of the canons and then add the video.....

anyway...having a 5DII won't get anyone that job but no camera would anyway....just shows that they used the right tool to get the job done...

[gwhitf]

anyway...having a 5DII won't get anyone that job but no camera would anyway....just shows that they used the right tool to get the job done...

I shot a job last fall in a similar fashion -- environmental portraits of bankers, on location -- and we shot the still frames first with one 5d2, (the Stills body), and then when finished, popped that body off the tripod and replaced it with a 5d2 body set up for Video, with external mic. It was so easy to transition from Stills to Video that everyone was shocked. Swap the bodies; attach the mic to the subject; switch from strobe to Modeling Lamp, and you were shooting in, literally, three minutes. Same lenses; same look; same depth of field; same everything. Except the stills were RAW and the Video was 1920.

If I'd planned it better I'd shot HMI instead of Profoto, but the video was almost an afterthought. But that's a testament to the design of the 5d2 -- even when it's an afterthought, it's just that easy.

And with each generation, it's only going to get easier and better.

[lisa_r]

pschefz, those videos are nice, and the stills have a great look. Nice retouching by industrial color. Thanks for the link. Indeed, whole high end campaign (stills and video) with the 5D2. And she said in the blog that they did the car video in one take! Canon is taking over, isn't it?

[KenS]

This is a very relevant question that I would phrase the following way.

Among the 50 best real world images I shot in 2009, I know for a fact that the focus was at the very exact location where I wanted it to be on all of them thanks to live view.

Had I shot these with a 645D or another back, for how many of these images:
- is critial focus really important?
- would it have been possible to achieve critical focus without live view (with or without AF, taking into account the issues with focus shift when re-composing)?

For the yes/no images, what is the actual resolution of a slighty off focused 40MP image?

I know that for my images perfect infinity focus is often critical, and I have rarely managed to reach perfect infinity focus on my D3x with either MF without live view or AF.

That is of course assuming that all the rest is done perfectly with the right tripod, head and technique.

Cheers,
Bernard

Perhaps a naive question, but here goes.  I've been shooting a Pentax 67 with Kodak TMax 100 and Fuji Velvia for several decades, landscape only, DOF from near to infinity is very important to me.  All my 67 lenses (45mm to 300 mm) are fixed focal length with easy to use DOF scales.  I learned years ago to stop down approx 1.5 to 2 stops more than the lens barrel markings (I can point to some reference articles if anyone is interested).   I  very rarely have DOF problems ( I print up to 24 by 30 inches) and I of course don't have Live View on my 67.

So, if I were to use my Pentax 67 lenses on a 645D body (or, get some additional 645 fixed focal length lenses) and pre-determine by theory and experiment how much more to stop down beyond the lens barrel marking for a 645 format/high res sensor (vs film), why would I ever need Live View?

My only experience with Live View is with the Canon G10 I occasionally use.  In this case there are of course no DOF scales (and since it is a zoom they would be of less value even if they existed).  I've had some good success achieving desired DOF with the G10 by simply estimating about 1/3 of way into the scene,  capturing the image (shot on a tripod as is all my work) and then carefully examining the expanded image on the LCD panel.  If it isn't sharp foreground to background  I take it again, no big deal unless the light is changing rapidly, etc.

For my specific usage (landscape, tripods, fixed focal length lenses with DOF scales used appropriately) I am very comfortable working with DOF scales and I don't see why I should care about Live View; am I missing something?

Ken

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,

The problem with DoF scales is that they are calculated for small prints viewed at a short distance.

Try this one:

http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials...-calculator.htm

and try changing eye-sight, print size and viewing distance.

I have seen this when I went from 135 on film to MF (Pentax 67), I have seen that my pictures were not sharper than with 135. Using DoF scales I mostly used f/8 markings for f/16 and so on.

With Digital the requirements are raised a few notches for a couple of reasons:

- Pixel peeping is very easy, push "actual pixels" and you look at a very large enlargement at close.
- There is very little loss of quality (MTF) from sensor to print (i'm not discussing lenses and AA-filter, just output from sensor)

One area which is problematic is alignment of components. For instance the position of the AF sensor must match the position of the sensor exactly and the same goes for the focusing screen. Tolerance in digital world are small.

Check out this article: http://www.josephholmes.com/news-sharpmediumformat.html

Best regards
Erik

Perhaps a naive question, but here goes.  I've been shooting a Pentax 67 with Kodak TMax 100 and Fuji Velvia for several decades, landscape only, DOF from near to infinity is very important to me.  All my 67 lenses (45mm to 300 mm) are fixed focal length with easy to use DOF scales.  I learned years ago to stop down approx 1.5 to 2 stops more than the lens barrel markings (I can point to some reference articles if anyone is interested).   I  very rarely have DOF problems ( I print up to 24 by 30 inches) and I of course don't have Live View on my 67.

So, if I were to use my Pentax 67 lenses on a 645D body (or, get some additional 645 fixed focal length lenses) and pre-determine by theory and experiment how much more to stop down beyond the lens barrel marking for a 645 format/high res sensor (vs film), why would I ever need Live View?

My only experience with Live View is with the Canon G10 I occasionally use.  In this case there are of course no DOF scales (and since it is a zoom they would be of less value even if they existed).  I've had some good success achieving desired DOF with the G10 by simply estimating about 1/3 of way into the scene,  capturing the image (shot on a tripod as is all my work) and then carefully examining the expanded image on the LCD panel.  If it isn't sharp foreground to background  I take it again, no big deal unless the light is changing rapidly, etc.

For my specific usage (landscape, tripods, fixed focal length lenses with DOF scales used appropriately) I am very comfortable working with DOF scales and I don't see why I should care about Live View; am I missing something?

Ken

[BernardLanguillier]

Watch the news section in the coming days, some more info should show up.

Cheers,
Bernard

[BJNY]

Looking forward, Bernard.

Hope you'll answer:
• how responsive when pressing shutter release (any delay)
• how quickly image appears on 3" LCD
• how quickly 100% zoom in
• if Eye-Fi Wi-fi cards will work
• how many RAWs before pause (what buffer size)
• which other focal length lenses to be expected [soon]

Thanks,
Billy

[bcooter]

Looking forward, Bernard.

Hope you'll answer:
• how responsive when pressing shutter release (any delay)
• how quickly image appears on 3" LCD
• how quickly 100% zoom in
• if Eye-Fi Wi-fi cards will work
• how many RAWs before pause (what buffer size)
• which other focal length lenses to be expected [soon]

Thanks,
Billy

It fascinates me that this information on all cameras is not at the top of the annoucement, but I get the feeling that these (and most cameras) are first marketed to the upper middle class consumer then it's up to the professional to figure a way to make them work.

This is going to be an issue, that little dinky usb connection, is going to be covered with gaff tape, rubber bands and last minute gizmos to hold connection.

I would have sold both my 1ds3's the day the 5d2 came out if not for that secure usb connection on the 1ds3's.

It's been explained in length, but it doesn't matter, obviously they are marketing this camera to someone other than me.

BC

[eronald]

It fascinates me that this information on all cameras is not at the top of the annoucement, but I get the feeling that these (and most cameras) are first marketed to the upper middle class consumer then it's up to the professional to figure a way to make them work.

This is going to be an issue, that little dinky usb connection, is going to be covered with gaff tape, rubber bands and last minute gizmos to hold connection.

I would have sold both my 1ds3's the day the 5d2 came out if not for that secure usb connection on the 1ds3's.

It's been explained in length, but it doesn't matter, obviously they are marketing this camera to someone other than me.

BC

The 1Ds3 can *focus* when it works. The 5D usually focuses .. somewhere close.

Edmund

[BJNY]

.....obviously they are marketing this camera to someone other than me.

BC

Targeted at landscape photogs


so I don't expect tethering.