Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Medium Format / Film / Digital Backs – and Large Sensor Photography => Topic started by: smoody on January 11, 2010, 08:47:42 pm
-
take it for what it's worth, but I hope it's worth its weight in gold...
http://photorumors.com/2010/01/07/pentax-e...d-price-rumors/ (http://photorumors.com/2010/01/07/pentax-evil-645d-price-rumors/)
-
Great news!
-
is that sensor mentioned in the article the same model as the one in the P45+ back from P1?
Pentax has some nice M/F glass too. Just wish that this release could include a 6x7 version too, in their 67II body. damn, that would be sweet!
-Dan
-
I thought it was supposed to be the p40+ sensor?
-
somehow this reminds me of the whole ZD fiasco....i hope this turns out to be a contender...and at that price it really could be....
-
if it is a P45+like sensor (with long exposure and Weather sealed) it could be my camera !!
-
Something tells me the p40+ or p45+ type sensor isn't going into a $6500 camera, but I've been wrong before for example, I never would have predicted America would re-elect "W"
-
then a P25+
-
Yeah, 40 or 45 is unlikely, I guess the 31mp kodak sensor seems much more logical. It's nice to see something new! (ok newish)
-
is that sensor mentioned in the article the same model as the one in the P45+ back from P1?
I would bet that it uses this new Kodak 40MP one, in the same 44x33mm format that Pentax has been talking about all along but now with the new, improved 6 micron TrueSense pixels:
http://www.kodak.com:80/global/plugins/acr...ductSummary.pdf (http://www.kodak.com:80/global/plugins/acrobat/en/business/ISS/productsummary/FullFrame/KAF-40000ProductSummary.pdf)
If so, it might the first camera using that new Kodak sensor.
Pentax 67 lenses should be usable through the Pentax 645-to-67 adaptor; I se no point putting such a small sensor in an actual 67 body.
-
I read part of an interview with Pentax's CEO (President? Chairman? someone important) who said that they are focusing all of the effort on the 645D now and it'll be the next camera they ship. Makes perfect sense from a business perspective -- I believe it will be easier to sell a med format camera priced at the same price point as high-end DSLRs than it would be to try to get into the high-end DSLR market and the ensuing feature race. With med format, they can have fewer features, focus on low ISO performance, and have zero competition at that price point, if that is indeed the price point.
-
so if you're looking at this camera seriously,
start buying Pentax 645 lenses RIGHT NOW. cause we all know, when the system ships, and if its good, prices will sky-rocket!
Pentax 67 lenses should be usable through the Pentax 645-to-67 adaptor; I se no point putting such a small sensor in an actual 67 body.
naw, I was thinkin a 6x7 sensor baby! no futzing with 645 anymore, bring out the big guns! 40mp, 6x7 sized sensor(with sensor+ type pixel binning), so making a 10mp 6x7 sensor with ISO 1600? yum.....
will it happen(even in the next few years?), NO... unfortunately... but there would be a 100% chance I would buy it though, even if iso 800 was the highest I could go clean with little or no noise.
but personally, I'd prefer a 6x7 back for my RZ.
-Dan
-
More hints.
http://valentinsama.blogspot.com/2010/02/p...d-ahora-si.html (http://valentinsama.blogspot.com/2010/02/pentax-645d-ahora-si.html)
-
I have standardized on Canon but I would integrate MFD into my business tomorrow if I could get:
* ISO 200 (binning if necessary)
* Canon 1DM3 LCD screen (yeah I want the 5DII screen but beggars can't be choosy)
* LiveView on the LCD screen. (I will only manually focus)
* 35mm and 50mm prime equivalent. f2.8 in the MFD versions would be fine.
I don't care about megapixels, or shot speed or AF points or anything else because I have already banked on Canon. This is a tripod camera I am talking about here. Funny thing is that no matter what they price these new MFD offerings at... $6K or $60K they have not made my camera...
-
latest photos (rumored):
http://photorumors.com/2010/02/16/pentax-6...-final-version/ (http://photorumors.com/2010/02/16/pentax-645d-is-this-the-final-version/)
they look a lot like the photos of the prototype cameras.
-
Could it be true this time??!!
Everybody in E-bay for the lenses while they still are bargains.
And they kept the green button!...
Fred.
-
Yeah, 40 or 45 is unlikely, I guess the 31mp kodak sensor seems much more logical. It's nice to see something new! (ok newish)
The rumors in Japan point to around 40MP. Just everybody knows that Canon and Nikon will release soon 30+ megapixels cameras, except for some Pentax 645 film shooters, nobdy would go for the 645D at only 30MP.
If the price point is right, this could be an interesting entry for landscape. It remains to be seen how battery life in cold weather is going to be and whether life view is part of the deal... I'll probably stick to my d3x for now.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
"nobdy would go for the 645D at only 30MP."
i've bought a 22MP back 6 months after my Canon 22MP... the canon takes dust !
-
..yep, but 22MP was the first rumor and would be quite "disapointing" at this time. I think Bernard is right.
-
The rumors in Japan point to around 40MP. Just everybody knows that Canon and Nikon will release soon 30+ megapixels cameras, except for some Pentax 645 film shooters, nobdy would go for the 645D at only 30MP.
If the price point is right, this could be an interesting entry for landscape. It remains to be seen how battery life in cold weather is going to be and whether life view is part of the deal... I'll probably stick to my d3x for now.
Cheers,
Bernard
The problem with a 30mp DSLR is that it will suffer from diffraction effects much sooner. If you like to shoot stopped down for big DOF this will be a problem, and even at equal or less pixels the MF solution will be better and cameras like the pentax could still be an attractive solution. Don't worry Bernard you could still stitch to your hearts content with any MF camera.
-
The rumors in Japan point to around 40MP. Just everybody knows that Canon and Nikon will release soon 30+ megapixels cameras, except for some Pentax 645 film shooters, nobdy would go for the 645D at only 30MP.
Megapixels are not everything. I'm curious about this camera simply for how it might feel to actually shoot it. I love how the LCD and the buttons are pointed backwards, toward the user of the camera, rather than forward, like the H Hasselblad. (Although many of my subjects do find it comfortable to simply lean forward and read the LCD off the H, if I ask them what fstop I'm shooting at). Some people find the 24x36 proportion of the Canon and Nikon to be severely restrictive when shooting vertical images; while this Pentax does not seem to offer a vertical grip, oddly, they seem to offer a tripod mount on both the side and bottom! So I guess no need for an RRS plate. If I bought this camera, I'd have to buy some travel stickers and affix them to the camera body; the camera to me makes me think of some kind of sea animal. Maybe paint it green, and add couple of fake eyeballs glued to either side of the body, Rodney Dangerfield style, in those sloped areas on either side of the Pentax logo. The only downside of this camera is the lack of pop-up flash, hidden in the viewfinder.
-
Everybody in E-bay for the lenses while they still are bargains.
Fred.
I already bought a mint used 35mm focal length lens a couple of weeks ago for a very good price as a hedge. :-)
-
The problem with a 30mp DSLR is that it will suffer from diffraction effects much sooner. If you like to shoot stopped down for big DOF this will be a problem, and even at equal or less pixels the MF solution will be better and cameras like the pentax could still be an attractive solution. Don't worry Bernard you could still stitch to your hearts content with any MF camera.
Nope, you will always have a better DoF/diffraction compromise with smaller sensors everything else being equal. This should be fairly obvious if you have ever used LF. The only potential problem with smaller sensors is lack of DR, but since FX sensor technology is typically one generation ahead compared to cheaper MF alternatives like the Pentax, we have that one mostly covered so far.
Yep, I could keep stitching as long as the battery isn't dead at -15C... and I strongly doubt that unfortunately...
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Megapixels are not everything. I'm curious about this camera simply for how it might feel to actually shoot it. I love how the LCD and the buttons are pointed backwards, toward the user of the camera, rather than forward, like the H Hasselblad. (Although many of my subjects do find it comfortable to simply lean forward and read the LCD off the H, if I ask them what fstop I'm shooting at). Some people find the 24x36 proportion of the Canon and Nikon to be severely restrictive when shooting vertical images; while this Pentax does not seem to offer a vertical grip, oddly, they seem to offer a tripod mount on both the side and bottom! So I guess no need for an RRS plate. If I bought this camera, I'd have to buy some travel stickers and affix them to the camera body; the camera to me makes me think of some kind of sea animal. Maybe a couple of fake eyeballs glued to either side of the body, Rodney Dangerfield style.
Indeed, that would work.
I guess that it will be released at the camera show in Tokyo in March. I'll try to cover the show and do a quick hands on with it asap.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
I guess that it will be released at the camera show in Tokyo in March.
If they actually do sell this camera for $6500 US, they'd better crank up the production lines, because they're going to fly off the shelves.
-
If they actually do sell this camera for $6500 US, they'd better crank up the production lines, because they're going to fly off the shelves.
Yes, on the other hand I'd be surprised if it were ready to ship the day of the announcement...
As a side note, it appears it might be announced on March 11th... which happens to be my birthday... maybe I should pay closer attention to this camera...
http://www.cpplus.jp/en/visitor/index.html (http://www.cpplus.jp/en/visitor/index.html)
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Nope, you will always have a better DoF/diffraction compromise with smaller sensors everything else being equal. This should be fairly obvious if you have ever used LF. The only potential problem with smaller sensors is lack of DR, but since FX sensor technology is typically one generation ahead compared to cheaper MF alternatives like the Pentax, we have that one mostly covered so far.
Yep, I could keep stitching as long as the battery isn't dead at -15C... and I strongly doubt that unfortunately...
Cheers,
Bernard
Have a look here at this article:http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/resolution.shtml
You might have more DOF with a smaller sensor but less detail. Here's a quote, "You have all the data at hand, but take the green-yellow light and f/8-f/11 aperture values as a reference. It represents a realistic, not too demanding case. Consider a 35mm system with a lens at f/11. At best, the maximum resolution you will get is equivalent to 16 MP, even if your camera has 22 or 25 MP. In the case of an APS-C based system the limit goes to 7 MP, and 4 MP considering a Four Thirds format. Stopping down to f/22 the limit of the effective resolution of the 35mm based system goes to 4 MP!"
-
Have a look here at this article:http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/resolution.shtml
You might have more DOF with a smaller sensor but less detail.
Only if you choose to compare at equal f-stop, but if the goal is equally great DOF, the smaller format will use a less high aperture ratio [equal effective aperture diameter in fact], which equalizes the effects of diffraction on sharpness. (It gives diffraction spots smaller in equal proportion to how much smaller the image is, so equal sized when images are displayed at equal size.)
Maybe this site needs a FAQ (Frequently Argued Questions), to allow quick debunking of frequently stated myths like "smaller formats are more diffraction limited when you need to stop down for DOF".
-
Only if you choose to compare at equal f-stop, but if the goal is equally great DOF, the smaller format will use a less high aperture ratio [equal effective aperture diameter in fact], which equalizes the effects of diffraction on sharpness. (It gives diffraction spots smaller in equal proportion to how much smaller the image is, so equal sized when images are displayed at equal size.)
Maybe this site needs a FAQ (Frequently Argued Questions), to allow quick debunking of frequently stated myths like "smaller formats are more diffraction limited when you need to stop down for DOF".
I'm referring to smaller sensel sites not format size. If you pack 30mp into a 35mm format the sensel sites are going to be smaller than if you pack them into a MF sized sensor. Above in the thread someone suggested no one would buy a 22mp pentax 645 if Canikon had 30+mp cameras coming out and I'm pointing out that a MF 22mp MF chip will still have advantages over the DSLR equiv. Since light has set wavelengths the argument about smaller sensors giving more DOF with equal detail is not going to hold water.
-
... the argument about smaller sensors giving more DOF with equal detail is [not] going to hold water.
Agreed, adding the "not" that I think you intended. But that is not what I said, and your initial claim about a smaller format getting _less_ detail, due to greater diffraction effects, with equal DOF is equally invalid.
One more time: printed (or otherwise displayed) with the image of the subject the same size, the aperture that gives equal diffraction spot size on the print also gives equal sized circle of confusion (OOF effects) at each part of the image. This happens with equal effective aperture _diameter_ (a.k.a. entrance pupil size) regardless of format, so that the angular spread of light due to diffraction is equal. I am not sure, but you still seem to be thinking about equal f-stop comparisons when you talk about smaller pixel sizes and more DOF.
There are potential advantages to larger formats, but reducing diffraction problems in high DOF images is not one of them.
-
I love how the LCD and the buttons are pointed backwards, toward the user of the camera, rather than forward, like the H Hasselblad. (Although many of my subjects do find it comfortable to simply lean forward and read the LCD off the H, if I ask them what fstop I'm shooting at).
A few observations:
1) When the camera is in horizontal orientation, the LCD on the Hasselblad H grip does not face forward. It faces up. Just where you would want it if you are using a waist-level finder, or are shooting with the camera at a low angle or any other time that you are above the camera and not behind it.
2) When the camera is pointed straight down (as it would when photographing your subjects feet rather than face) then yes, the grip LCD would face forward. Also if doing repro work on a stand with the camera pointed down (waist-level finder is very handy here) then the grip LCD is facing forward where you can see it.
3) On the H4D cameras, aperture and shutter speed settings can be displayed on the 3" LCD panel on the back in addition to being displayed on the the grip LCD and in the viewfinder. Change aperture or shutter speed and the new settings are automatically displayed on the back LCD (rear), grip LCD (top) and viewfinder simultaneously.
4) You can still ask your subjects to tell you what aperture you're using. Maybe they'll feel more involved in the process.
-
Agreed, adding the "not" that I think you intended. But that is not what I said, and your initial claim about a smaller format getting _less_ detail, due to greater diffraction effects, with equal DOF is equally invalid.
One more time: printed (or otherwise displayed) with the image of the subject the same size, the aperture that gives equal diffraction spot size on the print also gives equal sized circle of confusion (OOF effects) at each part of the image. This happens with equal effective aperture _diameter_ (a.k.a. entrance pupil size) regardless of format, so that the angular spread of light due to diffraction is equal. I am not sure, but you still seem to be thinking about equal f-stop comparisons when you talk about smaller pixel sizes and more DOF.
There are potential advantages to larger formats, but reducing diffraction problems in high DOF images is not one of them.
Sounds intelligent, if I am charitable and skip over the pedantic "One more time" stuff, but I think you're missing something important so please do some more reading and preferably testing before you go out and write that FAQ okay? Now since this thread is about the Pentax Rumor let's get back to it. What about the pentax lenses? Are they decent? I'm guessing they must be from the interest.
-
Now since this thread is about the Pentax Rumor let's get back to it. What about the pentax lenses? Are they decent? I'm guessing they must be from the interest.
For what it is worth, the Pentax 645 system has been THE landscape camera in Japan for many many years. The lenses are said to be excellent.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Yes, the lens are exelent. Not exactly in the same league than Hasselblad but not far. In the past, the 645 system and also the 67 Pentax have been intensively used by a lot of professionals. These were indestructible cameras. Generaly, Pentax lenses are really good value. I have a few of these manual glasses and the mechanism is absolutely perfect, even after 30 years. The feeling (sensation in hand) is by far superior to any Canon o Nikon old primes. It is more in the Zeiss or Leica R league, so the pleasure is real. Pentax is a small company but their gear are built with high quality standard. The only concern is that now a digital camera is also a computer, and that is where Canon, Nikon and Sony, as big companies, have more mediums in research-devellopment.
My concern is that it is not CMOS and lack video. But sure this Pentax in image quality is going to be top-class.
Fred.
-
Pentax have missed a trick here.
Why go down the ill fated integrated approach like the Mamiya ZD, which most people suggest was a bit of a failure (maybe more to do with sensor implementation rather than concept).
I would have liked an open-back system, especially if the ubiquitous lenses are as good as people are saying and as affordable too - even less than the mamiya offerings (like for like), which are no slouch optically either. Does anybody know if the af system in the pentax 645 is based upon motors in the camera itself, like the mamiya AFD system, or if they are in the lenses like most 35 mm cameras. I only ask, as if you look at mamiya, the only way you can get better Af performance is to go get one of the ever newer incarnations of the AFD, such as the AFDIII or the latest Phamiya one DCF etc. If this is the case with pentax, then more's the better as the presumably can put the very latest autofocus technology into the body and make even quite old lenses focus quickly/accurately. If however the motors are based in the old legacy lenses - the only ones availble now, then there is a problem. Good though the lenses may be optically, no amount of jiggery pokey at the body end would be able to improve things?!
I suppose given there are no third party backs with a pentax mount - for obvious reasons - there would be no market for used third party compatible backs (a growing market and a "cheap" way into MFDB's), and I suppose Phase one isn't going to rush out to make one (a mount for pentax for its backs) or have capture one compatibility, if people can go out and buy a pentax 645 body and full set of lenses for half the price of the Phase One alternatives!!
However by the same token Phase/sinar/leaf might also nab some massive latent Pentax 645 film user base that want to use their backs with their existing lens set up! I have no idea how big this fan base might be and as to whether it "would pay". Certainly if you are a pentax user $7K will buy you a nice second hand back from a third party, such as a 22Mp back or even a 33/39MP back.
It's an interesting business model becuase an open platform option now, would mean that all new Leaf/sinar and maybe Phase backs might support the platform in the future (or even intro into the existing line of backs hte pentax mount) and there-by increase the market for the lesnes and any new digital lenses in the pipeline. My guess is that the margins for an integrated digital platform (in fact what they seem to be releasing) would be higher than the increased lens market base for third party back buyers ?
One good thing is that these integrated back cameras are generally more compact and lighter than modular designs. I, like others have commented would prefer to buy a 22Mp "full frame (well OK 1.1X crop)" camera rather than a 31MP cropped sensor product, especially if I was into landscapes (and I am). I am fed up of not using all of a lenses image circle (I shoot with the heavilly crop 16MP sensor MFDB). I can tell you, that if you are humping many KG's of Japaneese glass around the mountains, you are going to want to feel that all that glass is doing something usefull (and not just "the middle bit")!!
just my thoughts
Ed
-
pentax until now never had intershangeable back's, only inserts wich makes it very difficult for others to create a back for it. So no third party back's will be available. Besides, there are som many used back's for sale, proven systems, extreme quality. Never jump into a new system as it will have a lot of problems the first years to come.
-
Never jump into a new system as it will have a lot of problems the first years to come.
To be fair to Pentax, this wouldnt exactly be their first camera and plenty of 'old' systems have their problems too. If they sell their 645D at the rumoured price, then I think you will have a lot of people jumping all over it.
-
I've been saving some of my choice 67 lenses just in case they finally came out with this!
The 100 macro for the 67 is the highest resolving MF lens I think I've ever used.
-
I've been saving some of my choice 67 lenses just in case they finally came out with this!
The 100 macro for the 67 is the highest resolving MF lens I think I've ever used.
Here we go: http://cgi.ebay.es/EXCELLENT-SMC-PENTAX-67...=item19b9ed1a2e (http://cgi.ebay.es/EXCELLENT-SMC-PENTAX-67-100mm-MACRO-with-1to1-CONVERTER_W0QQitemZ110493506094QQcmdZViewItemQQptZUK_Photography_Film_Cameras_ET?hash=item19b9ed1a2e)
This is not gonna last for long...
-
... on film.
On velvia and techpan. ;o)
It resolves 85 -90 LP/mm. To be honest, I'm not sure what the digital lenses resolve though. Maybe I'm way off.
-
On velvia and techpan. ;o)
It resolves 85 -90 LP/mm. To be honest, I'm not sure what the digital lenses resolve though. Maybe I'm way off.
You would be surprised how good these genuine vintage lenses are on digital. Ok, it is manual focussing, but if you can live with it, just make a test on digital with a modern top lens and one of these vintage primes...it is worth to see it by yourself, really.
And the feel in hand is unbeatable.
-
How exactly are you using these vintage Pentax 6x7 lenses on digital?
Of course, you understood that I'm talking about 35mm vintage lenses, because Pentax has not yet released their 645D so a comparaison is not yet possible.
Having shooted with both (new and vintage manual) on Pentax DSLR, I came to the conclusion that these old lenses are really on the top, BUT only if you are
interested in manual focussing, otherwise you might find them an hassle.
It is going to be more or less the same with 645D, even better as the old Pentax 6x7 lenses are known to be extremely good and recognized so worldwide.
There is nothing new in what I'm saying, there are extensive evidence from the users about that fact all over the web, and I confirm this fact: Vintage Pentax lenses are really good and worth a look.
Fred.
-
I do not know the Pentax lenses but it depends so much on each lens... you should expect many surprises.
Some old manual focus lenses are more than excellent in digital (I think about some of the Zeiss & Schneider lenses on Rollei mount), others seems inappropriate (the best example could be the famous Biogon 38mm which is not necessary the best choice for a digital use).
-
I do not know the Pentax lenses but it depends so much on each lens... you should expect many surprises.
Some old manual focus lenses are more than excellent in digital (I think about some of the Zeiss & Schneider lenses on Rollei mount), others seems inappropriate (the best example could be the famous Biogon 38mm which is not necessary the best choice for a digital use).
You are absolutly right François.
I is worth mentioning that not all works well in digital. I'd say to avoid third-party lenses (a part from some exceptions and you might check before on the web from users reports).
In the case of Pentax and resuming, the lenses that where generaly highly regarded in the film age also have a very good reputation in digital but there are some cases where it does not work and ones have to check case by case and find informations.
For example, the mytic 50mm f1.4 performs better in digital than the f1.2 much more expensive.
But in general, the good ones are a "secure value" than is reflected in the second-hand market.
Now, for the 645D it will be another story as it is another market and 99% of the lenses will just work fine.
Fred.
-
How exactly are you using these vintage Pentax 6x7 lenses on digital?
There is an Contax 645 adapter for Pentax 67 lenses. They are wonderful lenses on digital.
-
Only Pentax lenses I owned were the 6x7 format ones - the 55mm and 200mm. The 67ll body was solid but the shutter bounce made me give up in the end. Also, the very slow synch with the huge focal plane shutter was not that wonderful an experience; perhaps if Pentax had made a series of shuttered lenses à la Hasselblad it would have been different; as far as I remember, they only made them in 100mm and 160mm and then stopped one or the other of those. A digital back on that body - I wouldn't hope so.
But when you consider that Mario Testino, Marino Parisotto Vay and Sante D'Orazio have done very well with that camera...
Rob C
-
Only Pentax lenses I owned were the 6x7 format ones - the 55mm and 200mm. The 67ll body was solid but the shutter bounce made me give up in the end. Also, the very slow synch with the huge focal plane shutter was not that wonderful an experience; perhaps if Pentax had made a series of shuttered lenses à la Hasselblad it would have been different; as far as I remember, they only made them in 100mm and 160mm and then stopped one or the other of those. A digital back on that body - I wouldn't hope so.
But when you consider that Mario Testino, Marino Parisotto Vay and Sante D'Orazio have done very well with that camera...
Rob C
add peter lindberg to that....
-
You would be surprised how good these genuine vintage lenses are on digital. Ok, it is manual focussing, but if you can live with it, just make a test on digital with a modern top lens and one of these vintage primes...it is worth to see it by yourself, really.
And the feel in hand is unbeatable.
I've used Pentax lenses on the contax with a p31+, p21+ and Aptus 22
This is with the Aptus 22 with the pentax 105 2.4 lens
[attachment=20363:pentax.jpg]
They're sharp, but have a different look of the Zeiss lenses which are more contrasty or better put crisp.
These forums seem to be all about nat's eyelash sharpness but there's a lot more to a phtoograph than ultimate sharpness, and "detail" whatever ultimate is.
Anyway, Pentax makes nice lenses they have a good look and the people that loved the 6x7 are still using them today.
BC
-
Hi,
I have a Pentax 67 with 45, 9072.8, 165/2.8 and 300/4 lenses which I obviously only used with film. My experience is that very fine (stunning!) 70x100 cm enlargements are very well possible with scanned images using Velvia and Provia. On the other hand I can see a lot of problems in the scanned images in actual pixels view. Chromatic aberration is pretty bad, which is quite obvious.
One thing I also noticed that images a friend shot with his Hasselblad (same subject, same condition, same time) were better than mine. This may depend on my friend having better technique or the Hasselblad having better lenses.
Now, the Pentax 645 may have better lenses than the Pentax 67, but I wouldn't hold my breath that they are good enough for digital. Just as a reminder:
Michael Reichmann found that his Canon 1Ds? essentially outperformed his Contax 645, mostly because of limitations with his Zeiss lenses. Hasselblad uses a new lens line for their cameras, calculated at Hasselblad and built at Fujinon. At least in the MTF data published by Hasselblad the new HC (Fujinon) lenses are clearly better (MTF-wise) as the old Zeiss designs. Any one can check, MTF data can be downloaded from Hasselblads website.
Michael returned to medium format, but started out with new Rodenstock Digitar lenses, specially designed for use with MFDBs.
A quoute from the Reichmann article: "But after more than a year of shooting both with a 16MP Canon 1Ds MKII and a 22 MP P25 back on the Contax, I came to a couple of realizations. The Canon and Zeiss lenses on their respective cameras were not the equal of their sensors. In other words, the sensors were outperforming the lenses. Even using the best primes on the Canon proved to me that the 1Ds MKII was not being pushed to its limit, and using lesser lenses often disappointed."
The whole article is here: http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/...ital-view.shtml (http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/digital-view.shtml)
Best regards
Erik
Only Pentax lenses I owned were the 6x7 format ones - the 55mm and 200mm. The 67ll body was solid but the shutter bounce made me give up in the end. Also, the very slow synch with the huge focal plane shutter was not that wonderful an experience; perhaps if Pentax had made a series of shuttered lenses à la Hasselblad it would have been different; as far as I remember, they only made them in 100mm and 160mm and then stopped one or the other of those. A digital back on that body - I wouldn't hope so.
But when you consider that Mario Testino, Marino Parisotto Vay and Sante D'Orazio have done very well with that camera...
Rob C
-
My interest in these older lenses is just how well they perform when used for digital capture.
I was given some Hasselblad .fff files recently taken using a variety of V series lenses in combination with a Hasselblad 39 MP back. Unsurprisingly there was variation between the lenses and perhaps unsurprisingly there were a lot of focussing errors. Having said that, those that were sharp were knuckle-grazing sharp to the extent that they did the model no favours at all, but did prove the ability of these vintage lenses to deliver sharp files when needed.
As to whether 'sharpness' and 'detail' are important, well, it rather depends on the intention.
http://www.16-9.net/lens_tests/pentax645_fa35mm.html (http://www.16-9.net/lens_tests/pentax645_fa35mm.html)
I don´t think this is a matter of resolution or, better said, resolving power.
Or not at least THAT much about resolving power.
My biggest fears on old lenses are fringing and flare, which can get quite harsh with old lenses, and the working aperture [or best working aperture] does, indeed, change.
-
add peter lindberg to that....
And to think I had him down as a Nikonista! He also used to use Hasselblads, since I saw some of his work in one of their publications many years ago. Though I do like his shots in old factories, I never did go for his Pirelli work nor, for that matter, his taste in models. How odd that even model stratosphere can have some that turn one right off!
;-)
Rob C
-
With this repeated cross-indexing, does anyone know if James R and BC are one and the same? Most confusing. And if so, why so?
Rob C
-
Regardless of lenses, (though with Pentax I'm pretty sure they be very good) and regardless that were talking about a camera that nobody I know has ever held, I think the real key to this is the $6,500 medium format price for a new camera.
That's where this stuff needed to be all along and honestly if medium format backs had been in this price range 6 years ago, there would a lot more RZs, V series, Contax's and Bronicas still in use rather than sitting on dusty shelves.
At this price it will open up the joys (well let's hope not all the "joys") of medium format ownership without the huge buy in and depreciation, but also offer a lot of things we've been asking for a long time like a really good lcd and in camera jpegs.
As far as being ZD like, time will tell, but that's probably painting it with a pretty broad brush and all of medium format has a lot of things in the past and present that are somewhat zd like, so that's a door I wouldn't want to open if I was comparing.
I hope it succeeds and opens up medium format for more people, more use, because at this price this is something you just about would have to have in your bag.
BC
-
Unsurprisingly there was variation between the lenses and perhaps unsurprisingly there were a lot of focussing errors.
*********
My "V" lenses, with digital, out perform my aged eye to focus them. I have just purchased a 5.5 X mag hood to use with my 203, hopefully to be more consistent with "dead on" focus. Using the "Vs" with a Nikon, the sharpness is quite good using live view at max zoom + 3.3 mag hood. In brief testing, using a lens testing target, the old Zeiss was equal to or better than Nikon lenses at approx same focal lengths. I was surprised after reading many comments that new "35" mm lenses designed with CAD and using new glass were better then old "slide-rule" designed MF lenses.
Steve
-
Unsurprisingly there was variation between the lenses and perhaps unsurprisingly there were a lot of focussing errors.
*********
My "V" lenses, with digital, out perform my aged eye to focus them. I have just purchased a 5.5 X mag hood to use with my 203, hopefully to be more consistent with "dead on" focus. Using the "Vs" with a Nikon, the sharpness is quite good using live view at max zoom + 3.3 mag hood. In brief testing, using a lens testing target, the old Zeiss was equal to or better than Nikon lenses at approx same focal lengths. I was surprised after reading many comments that new "35" mm lenses designed with CAD and using new glass were better then old "slide-rule" designed MF lenses.
Steve
Steve, I was surprised too...but it seems that this is a taboo topic. The fact that pentax DSLR have a lack in current modern optics, and the fact that the mount is 100% compatible with all vintage Pentax lenses, many pentax users have purchased vintage lenses more than in any other brand. There are sometimes problems (flare), sometimes not, the main issue as you said is that manual focussing with the garbage viewfinders we have now is a real problem if not using live-view. But...the quality is extremely high...better than new 35mm lenses? If your familiar with these I'm sure you have the answer, but...shhh...taboo subject.
As BC said, I hope it succeeds and bring more people to MFD. A lot of big masters have been working with this system and it will be nice to see Pentax in MFD again.
-
And,
ahem, ahem.
There is this funny question that apparently nobody is asking, and apparently it seems to be quite obvious.
Were this Pentax be all the rumours true, how will Leica look like?
All the machinery conceived, I mean.
There seems to be quite a difference in price, and 645 lenses are no slouch on either side. And the Pentax 645NII was a very well built machine, as well. In a very japanese way of thinking, but a very well built machine [plus some very clever hoods, specially for polarizing filters].
But 6500 usd vs. 23000 usd seems a tad too much.
[although that is the very difference between the K7 and M8, I know].
Edit:
I just want to come clear:
No, I´m not looking forward to start a war, or similar. I just want to know the opinions of y´all about two systems which are ranging from very expensive [Pentax] to extremely expensive [Leica].
Becasue still the cheapest way to go for a DMF camera is a steampunked Holga [which I wonder when they are coming up to with].
-
That $6500 price tag is a rumored price. I wouldn't be surprised if the camera comes in at $8500 or more, but it sort-of depends (sadly) on how many pixels the next gen Canon 1Ds (*rumored* to be announced this week) crams onto its sensor and what the price point is. If they manage to cram 35-ish megapixels onto their sensor and it costs, say, $7000 USD, then that's the benchmark for pricing the 645D, in my opinion. They have to figure out how prosumers will react given the difference in features, megapixels, high-iso image quality, device size, etc. I'm guessing the Canon will win on every front except for two perhaps: megapixels and overall image quality. Given that, can Pentax price it higher than the Canon? Or does it have to be equal or lower priced?
It's obvious that I think the 645D is Pentax's answer to the Canon 1Ds. However, if it comes in at anywhere close to the price point being bandied about, I think it'll send shivers down a lot of vendors' spines. But, the fact that Hasselblad announced and priced the new H4DII-40 before the Pentax announcement means that they're not too worried (or they didn't see it coming).
-
That $6500 price tag is a rumored price. I wouldn't be surprised if the camera comes in at $8500 or more, but it sort-of depends (sadly) on how many pixels the next gen Canon 1Ds (*rumored* to be announced this week) crams onto its sensor and what the price point is. If they manage to cram 35-ish megapixels onto their sensor and it costs, say, $7000 USD, then that's the benchmark for pricing the 645D, in my opinion. They have to figure out how prosumers will react given the difference in features, megapixels, high-iso image quality, device size, etc. I'm guessing the Canon will win on every front except for two perhaps: megapixels and overall image quality. Given that, can Pentax price it higher than the Canon? Or does it have to be equal or lower priced?
It's obvious that I think the 645D is Pentax's answer to the Canon 1Ds. However, if it comes in at anywhere close to the price point being bandied about, I think it'll send shivers down a lot of vendors' spines. But, the fact that Hasselblad announced and priced the new H4DII-40 before the Pentax announcement means that they're not too worried (or they didn't see it coming).
I think Hasselblad does not have to worried about the Pentax, these 2 were co-existing perfectly in film age and each model has its style and lovers.
But I bet Pentax will be cheap. Their recent politics is about agressive prices but with good features. I'm sure it will not be up 7000.
And it is official, this model will be released.
-
I'll post here what I've already posted on another thread.
If the Pentax is really delivered and is really $6500 and is really 40MP and is really anything other than a bug-eyed dog without a mother then the fun will be seeing the reaction of the other MFD players.
I agree.
But I would be shocked.
I am fully expecting a 31 megapixel product. And in that case, it still opens up a little bit of a new market for that sensor/camera combination.
But we'll see. Looking forward to it.
Steve Hendrix
-
If the Pentax is really delivered and is really $6500 and is really 31MP and is really anything other than a bug-eyed dog without a mother then the fun will be seeing the reaction of the other MFD players.
Keith, your bug-eyed dogs are memories of Ibiza; they used to roam Mallorca too until there was a cull some years ago.
Rob C
-
If the Pentax is really delivered and is really $6500 and is really 31MP and is really anything other than a bug-eyed dog without a mother then the fun will be seeing the reaction of the other MFD players.
LOL
Yes it will be interesting, hopefully the other MFD makers will realise that a lot of photographers would actually prefer it was 31MP but 40MP would do i guess.
Should be fun.
-
Rob, could well be, they used to break my heart.
Unfortunately they're all over the Med. The Greek strays have the unfortunate habit of following the white lines in the middle of the road.
Keith
H Keih
That's why the Greeks have white lines - not for traffic control and/or flags at all. They never broke my heart, those dogs - I hated them. When we moved here we brought out our alsabrador bitch and I remember walking her near the Illa d'Or hotel one evening when one of those little runts sped off its mark towards us. I thought: suicide, ya bass! No, it ran right past her and took a nip at my ankle instead. Who says they can't read emotions? Anyway, I let my pooch off the leash and yelled at her to kill the bugger, but she just wagged her tail at me. Infamy, infamy, they all have it in for me.
Rob C
-
H Keih
That's why the Greeks have white lines - not for traffic control and/or flags at all. They never broke my heart, those dogs - I hated them. When we moved here we brought out our alsabrador bitch and I remember walking her near the Illa d'Or hotel one evening when one of those little runts sped off its mark towards us. I thought: suicide, ya bass! No, it ran right past her and took a nip at my ankle instead. Who says they can't read emotions? Anyway, I let my pooch off the leash and yelled at her to kill the bugger, but she just wagged her tail at me. Infamy, infamy, they all have it in for me.
Rob C
As a 4th year vet student I can not condone your attitutes to animals, only your dogs response !
As for the Kenneth Williams' quote... nice, but some how I don't think much of the luminous landscape audience will apreichiate that level of comic genius!
-
As a 4th year vet student I can not condone your attitutes to animals, only your dogs response !
As for the Kenneth Williams' quote... nice, but some how I don't think much of the luminous landscape audience will apreichiate that level of comic genius!
Ed, I appreciate you are still just a student and must by definition have stars in your eyes; but you have misjudged me: I only dislike animals that bite me though I do mistrust most of them, the human ones included; that's doing nothing more than returning the natural compliment in nature, observing the code to survival.
I have fed a pack of cats numbered in the mid-twenties for years, knew every single one by a given name and wept tears as their kittens died of 'flu or went blind from some unknown disease that turned their eyes into white grapes. I have rescued every dog I have had straight from the dog pound. I hope your post was in jest and not serious.
But thanks for the comic genius bit - I was vain enough to take that at face value (and apply it to myself too) without suspecting the worst!
;-)
Rob C
-
I've been travelling the Mediterranean for years and have seen sights so horrific they'll haunt me for ever.
While out walking recently I met a very well known politician - think eggs - and her two dogs. It transpired that she'd rescued one of the dogs from a Greek rubbish tip and had brought him back to the UK.
She gets my vote.
Or a hot political curry rather than eggs, Keith?
I wonder if she had to leave him in quarantine for six months... probably did.
When we brought our pooch out to Spain we had to wait until she was two years old before she could get her rabies shot and be permitted to travel out of Britain. She did the trip in a huge box with RSPCA spec that was, if I remember correctly, about twice the width, half a length longer and higher than the dog; she was big. Whatever it was it cost a bomb to have made and she travelled in the heated forward hold of an aircraft, accompanied by our daughter (not in the hold) who then had to see her through Mallorca customs when they arrived. My wife was at the waiting end and the first she saw of the dog was the crate on the conveyor belt. When it stopped, the crate was taken down off it and opened with our daghter supposedly taking charge of it and the paperwork. Of course, it saw my wife standing at the other side of the gap between the international and national areas and shot across the tiles, skidding all concerned in her excitement. (That was how I used to feel too in airports at one stage in life.) Anway, when the two parties met, the customs lads began to examine the paperwork - all correct - but the dog had other ideas and started to pee with joy. At the sight of that, the customs shooed all concerned the hell out of the concourse and the box got left behind - God knows what we would have done with it anyway - we only had a tiny car at that tme. But that arrival sure was something I would have loved to have seen. Unfortunately, I was back in Scotland doing some work.
The poor dog got cancer in one row of teats, had them removed, then it hit the other side. They were removed too and then it got her lungs and we couldn't face losing another after she died; the damn cats didn't give a shit - they took no notice of her even when she was fit and very active. That's cats; they live in a killer world of their own. Oddly, they can still make you weep when they die.
Take care
Rob C
-
You guys with your dog stories would surely find more suitable companions over on dpreview. I thought this was a MFD forum
-
You guys with your dog stories would surely find more suitable companions over on dpreview. I thought this was a MFD forum
As I don't own an MF and have no intentions in that direction, I think I have avoided direct comment on the breed; however, as it offends you, I shall retreat from further sound bites, my tail tucked firmly (dem wus the days) between my legs.
Aaron, I just love your captivating sense of humour.
Rob C
-
Apologies.
OK, let's get back to obsessing about cameras.
Exactly. Where do you walk your cameras when you are on holiday? And do you take them with you in restaurants and museums?
-
Aaron, I just love your captivating sense of humour.
Rob C
Bite Me.
-
Bite Me.
Only if you promise you have really really had your rabies shots - I'd hate to catch that!
Rob C
-
Any news?
-
Announcement said to be at CP+ Camera and Imaging Show (March 11th thru 14th) according to:
http://photorumors.com/2010/02/15/pentax-6...-itself-slowly/ (http://photorumors.com/2010/02/15/pentax-645d-is-revealing-itself-slowly/)
-
Announcement said to be at CP+ Camera and Imaging Show (March 11th thru 14th) according to:
http://photorumors.com/2010/02/15/pentax-6...-itself-slowly/ (http://photorumors.com/2010/02/15/pentax-645d-is-revealing-itself-slowly/)
I hope to be able to pay the show a visit on March 13th.
This is going to be a MF game changing camera. Knowing that many considered the A900 and D3x to have the same capability based on the fact that they share common specs, I would expect the [rumored 40 megapixel] 645D to be assessed by the market as being equivalent to the HD4-40 and 40 megapixels phasebacks... costing 2 or 3 times more.
The question remains whether this camera will be suitable for real outdoor work, I don't expect to get an answer to that question on March 13th.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
That's very interesting, because I use a 22mp back on a manual mamiya 645 pro and i don't think the sensor outperforms the lenses!
Hi,
I have a Pentax 67 with 45, 9072.8, 165/2.8 and 300/4 lenses which I obviously only used with film. My experience is that very fine (stunning!) 70x100 cm enlargements are very well possible with scanned images using Velvia and Provia. On the other hand I can see a lot of problems in the scanned images in actual pixels view. Chromatic aberration is pretty bad, which is quite obvious.
One thing I also noticed that images a friend shot with his Hasselblad (same subject, same condition, same time) were better than mine. This may depend on my friend having better technique or the Hasselblad having better lenses.
Now, the Pentax 645 may have better lenses than the Pentax 67, but I wouldn't hold my breath that they are good enough for digital. Just as a reminder:
Michael Reichmann found that his Canon 1Ds? essentially outperformed his Contax 645, mostly because of limitations with his Zeiss lenses. Hasselblad uses a new lens line for their cameras, calculated at Hasselblad and built at Fujinon. At least in the MTF data published by Hasselblad the new HC (Fujinon) lenses are clearly better (MTF-wise) as the old Zeiss designs. Any one can check, MTF data can be downloaded from Hasselblads website.
Michael returned to medium format, but started out with new Rodenstock Digitar lenses, specially designed for use with MFDBs.
A quoute from the Reichmann article: "But after more than a year of shooting both with a 16MP Canon 1Ds MKII and a 22 MP P25 back on the Contax, I came to a couple of realizations. The Canon and Zeiss lenses on their respective cameras were not the equal of their sensors. In other words, the sensors were outperforming the lenses. Even using the best primes on the Canon proved to me that the 1Ds MKII was not being pushed to its limit, and using lesser lenses often disappointed."
The whole article is here: http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/...ital-view.shtml (http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/digital-view.shtml)
Best regards
Erik
-
Announcement said to be at CP+ Camera and Imaging Show (March 11th thru 14th) according to:
http://photorumors.com/2010/02/15/pentax-6...-itself-slowly/ (http://photorumors.com/2010/02/15/pentax-645d-is-revealing-itself-slowly/)
Thanks!
-
It seems that the Ebay market has not reacted yet to that. Lens prices are quiet, but I doubt it will stay like that for a long time.
It is a good time for purchasing great optics at good prices because after the 13th...
-
It seems that the Ebay market has not reacted yet to that. Lens prices are quiet, but I doubt it will stay like that for a long time.
It is a good time for purchasing great optics at good prices because after the 13th...
I guess the fear (or hope ) is that Pentax will release some new glass with the 645d, so it may be worth it to wait and see. They had a new 55mm and a new "super-wide" listed on their road map for the 645D over a year ago if memory serves me correctly.
-
BJL always has the good info:
One comment: it has often been suggested, and again in that blog, that developing a multi-point AF module for 645 format would be prohibitively expensive ... but the very first MF camera with AF, the Pentax 645N, had three point AF, and the extra two should already help in a number of off-center subject situations. Maybe Pentax should sell that AF module to other 645 makers, at a suitably profitable "Hassleblad/Phase One" price point.
This is not the latest photo of the 645D rear (http://photorumors.com/2010/02/15/pentax-645d-is-revealing-itself-slowly/), but check out the slider switch circled in red:
[attachment=20676:Pentax_6...009_Back.jpg]
-
from manual of Pentax 645n:
[attachment=20677:from645nManual.jpg]
perhaps nothing to get excited about?
-
It has dual SDHC slots apparently.
Dual CF would be nice but dual sd is better than single cf I guess.
-
According to this translated link of a DC watch article provided by PhotoRumors, it is going to be a 40 megapixel sensor. And it'll launch in three days.
http://translate.google.com/translate?js=y...sl=ja&tl=en (http://translate.google.com/translate?js=y&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&layout=1&eotf=1&u=http://dc.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/news/20100308_353549.html&sl=ja&tl=en)
Will they actually pull it off for under $7000 USD? I have a hard time imagining that they will meet the rumored price point, but I hope I'm wrong.
-
According to this translated link of a DC watch article provided by PhotoRumors, it is going to be a 40 megapixel sensor. And it'll launch in three days.
http://translate.google.com/translate?js=y...sl=ja&tl=en (http://translate.google.com/translate?js=y&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&layout=1&eotf=1&u=http://dc.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/news/20100308_353549.html&sl=ja&tl=en)
Will they actually pull it off for under $7000 USD? I have a hard time imagining that they will meet the rumored price point, but I hope I'm wrong.
40 megapixel? No, it says 4000 megapixel! wow!
-
Odd that the countdown timer exists only on the Pentax Japan site, hopefully its availability is not going to be restricted to the Japanese market but its entirely possible.
-
BJL always has the good info:
This is not the latest photo of the 645D rear (http://photorumors.com/2010/02/15/pentax-645d-is-revealing-itself-slowly/), but check out the slider switch circled in red:
[attachment=20676:Pentax_6...009_Back.jpg]
this one is more recent
(http://img138.imageshack.us/img138/4693/pie09pentax18.jpg)
you can see AF selector
(http://img27.imageshack.us/img27/6072/pie09pentax22.jpg)
(http://img442.imageshack.us/img442/1024/pentax645digitalback.jpg)
-
If
it is around 5500 euro / 7000 dollar as a kit with one lens
and not limited to asia
and other lenses are okay and match the sensor capability
and performs on par with similar offerings
and despite it being b*tt-ugly
I did some hard thinking about I maybe ever would buy a CVF39 for my defunc 501CM but it's just too pricey.....but I might consider this one later this year, early next year, also instead of an hi pixel count DSLR and stick with my current DSLR for walk arounds....
this one is more recent
you can see AF selector
-
one thing that exists in the photos above that does not exist on the teaser site (at least in the same position) is the mirror lock-up button near the prism housing.
-
The thing that interests me about this camera is, here is a new (new to me) camera design, that, at first glance, seems pretty user friendly. But I just want to see it to see how it fits in my hand; how does the experience of photographing feel like. Screw the file quality, I don't care; I can retouch anything, i'm not looking for perfection. I work a file to death anyway. I just want a camera with a nice viewfinder that just feels right in my hand. (The H never did that, nor did the Contax. The Contax came closest; felt like a real camera, but the tiny dark viewfinder just killed it for me). I just want a CCD camera, with nice bright contrasty numbers in the viewfinder, that just feels good to walk around with. Everything else, I can deal with it in post.
-
Three, google translated, screenshots of the teaser website.
[attachment=20763:Schermaf...22.34.43.png]
[attachment=20764:Schermaf...22.35.09.png]
[attachment=20765:Schermaf...22.35.24.png]
-
The thing that interests me about this camera is, here is a new (new to me) camera design, that, at first glance, seems pretty user friendly. But I just want to see it to see how it fits in my hand; how does the experience of photographing feel like. Screw the file quality, I don't care; I can retouch anything, i'm not looking for perfection. I work a file to death anyway. I just want a camera with a nice viewfinder that just feels right in my hand. (The H never did that, nor did the Contax. The Contax came closest; felt like a real camera, but the tiny dark viewfinder just killed it for me). I just want a CCD camera, with nice bright contrasty numbers in the viewfinder, that just feels good to walk around with. Everything else, I can deal with it in post.
It probably will do all the things everyone needs in medium format (and more) and the pixel comparison guys are gonna flip trying to find a way to shoot holes in the concept of a new under 10 grand ccd, non aa filtered camera, but that will come in time and the forums will be ablaze saying yea but it doesn't have DAC, NAC, BAC, NSA, WI-FI, CA, DA, LA, KA, correction and is only limited to 20 stops of DR (whatever any of that stuff means).
The thing is by the time anyone realizes what a good deal it is, we're all gonna realize that if it don't shoot video then it's about as useful (in the commercial world) as a typewriter.
The shoot trees and brick wall guys are gonna luv it though.
BC
-
got that hass email today....h3d 31 for 9990...without lens....still does not do it for me...
i agree with gwhitf....how does it handle/feel in the hand...the H camera is ergonomically the worst camera i have ever had to work with....mamiya is fine but not more.....
i am waiting for the phase deal (not to buy, but to see the scramble).....but i guess they are waiting for the pentax announcement...
a couple of things this pentax HAS to do to be considerable:
shoot DNG....so i can use whatever i like...
make it some (older) available tether protocol, so software makers can jump on giving us options (because they will if they can charge 99$ for a simple piece of software)....
does not have to compete with the new hass 800iso but something close to that please....
A VERTICAL GRIP! i see it has a vertical tripod mount! yeah!
large bright finder......
don't skimp on buffer memory (like other expensive brands that start with L and end with A...)
i like the way it looks, even if it does not have a WLF which none of them do anyway anymore, so whatever....
at 6500 with lens this is 1/3 cheaper then the M9 i could not get myself to buy....with twice the sensor...
-
a couple of things this pentax HAS to do to be considerable:
shoot DNG....so i can use whatever i like...
dng according to this
[attachment=20771:pentax_6...dng_hdmi.jpg]
and HDMI port as well
-
SDHC cards? These things are too smalll for the human scale!
Bad news.
Eduardo
dng according to this
[attachment=20771:pentax_6...dng_hdmi.jpg]
and HDMI port as well
-
SDHC cards? These things are too smalll for the human scale!
Bad news.
Eduardo
i actually like SDHC cards...
also: i am sure it is the only way they can fit 2 cards inside the body, i really like the idea of 2 cards, back up,....
-
SDHC cards? These things are too smalll for the human scale!
Bad news.
Eduardo
I agree. They are scary small. Can't imagine shooting a paying job on one of those.
I was scratching my belly the other day while driving down the road, and two of those little SD cards fell out of one of the rolls above my belt. There's no telling how long they'd been stuck in there.
I prefer CF, but I guess we have no choice. Imagine what will replace SD cards; how many will fit on the head of a pin?
-
the latest sdhc cards are 32 and 64gb.....so there is almost no need to ever take them out....especially with automatic internal back up to a second card...as long as they are fast enough and can store enough images, they can't be small enough IMO....
i think pentax has been reading a lot of forums like this one....it will be interesting....
-
I agree. They are scary small. Can't imagine shooting a paying job on one of those.
I was scratching my belly the other day while driving down the road, and two of those little SD cards fell out of one of the rolls above my belt. There's no telling how long they'd been stuck in there.
I prefer CF, but I guess we have no choice. Imagine what will replace SD cards; how many will fit on the head of a pin?
The upside is they costs like a buck a gig and you can put a weeks shoot in your wallet.
I will admit they are a little small, but you get two of em so you can lose a few and be ok.
BC
-
I like SD cards, especially since Apple Macbook Pros and iMacs have built-in readers
Also, eventual SD-XC standard (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secure_Digital#SDXC) will scale up to 2 Terabytes.
-
Yes SD cards are scarily small, you wont be sticking them into your macbook while sitting on your deep shag pile rug but at least you can stick them in your macbook.....
Pentax have never really followed the herd, the old 645 always used those 'plug in' film inserts unlike the removable backs of the others. (there use to be 'others', not just Hassie and Phase..)
It will be great if the Pentax does the business, if only so we can ask "why does that Phamiya cost 25 grand?", plus it will be really nice for Hasselblad to have some of its old friends to play with rather than the new Phamiya upstarts.
Of course, it all depends on whether Pentax will sell you one! but i think even they could be shocked by the potential demand for this.
-
I hope Bernard will be able to cover the event. Date is very close now.
That will be great if Pentax surprises us in a good way.
Fred.
-
[attachment=20772:Untitled.jpg]
There's a news update #4 on the teaserpage that seems to confirm 40mpx.
-
This camera should be presented tomorrow 10th March, at the CP+ Yokohama Show...
The camera seems to be a great design. The question is the price.
-
[attachment=20772:Untitled.jpg]
There's a news update #4 on the teaserpage that seems to confirm 40mpx.
That is a good news indeed. I was frightened that Pentax would have done less but I see that they are doing things just right.
Their last dslr are telling that it actually is a good company.
-
I didn't read through this whole thread, but the News #1 from that site says that the camera has a sensor approximately 1.7x the size of a 35mm full frame sensor. After doing some math with the H4D-40, I've determined that the 33.1x44.2mm sensor from that camera is 1.69x the area of a 35mm frame, so Pentax is obviously using basically the same sensor.
-
I didn't read through this whole thread, but the News #1 from that site says that the camera has a sensor approximately 1.7x the size of a 35mm full frame sensor.
After doing some math with the H4D-40, I've determined that the 33.1x44.2mm sensor from that camera is 1.69x the area of a 35mm frame,
so Pentax is obviously using basically the same sensor.
Rumors of Pentax 645D started years ago mentioned 18mpx, 31mpx and now 40mpx sensor...all 33x44 size.
Unsure until now that Pentax wasn't using previous generation 31mpx sensor to achieve certain price point.
-
I didn't read through this whole thread, but the News #1 from that site says that the camera has a sensor approximately 1.7x the size of a 35mm full frame sensor. After doing some math with the H4D-40, I've determined that the 33.1x44.2mm sensor from that camera is 1.69x the area of a 35mm frame, so Pentax is obviously using basically the same sensor.
Who knows, maybe it is the Kodak KAF-40000. Apparently that sensor is used in the H4D-40 too......in a few days we will know more.
-
Pentax have never really followed the herd, the old 645 always used those 'plug in' film inserts unlike the removable backs of the others.
Thankfully,
I remember the Pentax 645 having bright, magnified view via their telescope style prism design;
and the film advance being quiet and buttery smooth via rubber? belt? drive?
Looking forward to the official specs.
-
The only time I've ever seen anyone actually use one of those Pentax 645's was in some PBS art show called "Egg", years ago. It was a feature on David LaChapelle. He seemed to keep the Profoto ringlight permanently attached to that Pentax camera, nonstop. That was his style at that time. I can't find the show on the web, but it's an interesting view if you can find it. Here's the closest I can find:
http://www.logotv.com/shows/dyn/eye_candy/about.jhtml (http://www.logotv.com/shows/dyn/eye_candy/about.jhtml)
-
It is looking like a lot of camera for the rumoured $6,500, I think there's been something lost in translation there, it has to cost more.
-
Could be $6,500
if you recall what Mamiya ZD was selling for (was it $8-10K at launch, decreasing to $6K ?)
At that time, it had more expensive and larger 36x48 size 22mpx Dalsa sensor.
-
It is looking like a lot of camera for the rumoured $6,500, I think there's been something lost in translation there, it has to cost more.
Perhaps it costs 6,500 Megadollars.
-
I reviewed (http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/645nii.shtml) the Pentax 645nII back in 2002 and thought very highly about it and its lenses,
My concern is with the digital side. Mamiya showed us with the ZD backs and camera that it isn't enough to simply put a large Kodak CCD sensor in a body. You also need the secret digital sauce. This is hard earned knowledge which just isn't that easy to come buy. Only Phase One, Hasselblad, Leaf and Leica currently have the expertise to make a high quality state-of-the-art medium format back or body at this time.
I hope that I'm wrong about the Pentax. It's been still-born now for some six years, I recall that Pentax had a mock-up which I saw on display at Photokina in 2006.
So let's get a bit excited about it, because if it can deliver it'll shake up the industry. But specs aren't enough. We have to get hold of one and get out and shoot with it before we'll know for sure.
Michael
-
It is looking like a lot of camera for the rumoured $6,500, I think there's been something lost in translation there, it has to cost more.
not neccesarily so, maybe they were able to reuse a lot of electronic components from the DSLR line like the image processing asic and firmware, too some extend it just needs to crunch bigger files and be adjusted for the signals coming from the sensor. Basically like in Photoshop: sharpening a small file or a big file, the algorithem is the same, only the parameters may be different.
Sourcing the sensor outside lowers R&D costs too but may proof expensive in the long run...
So maybe it is feasible to have an aggressive price tag attached.....
-
You also need the secret digital sauce. This is hard earned knowledge which just isn't that easy to come buy.
That is the key thing right there -- the secret sauce. Do they have it? I have my doubts. (Look at Leica).
There are a million questions.
But without telling David Grover this, my feeling is that this Pentax camera will be a massive success if it does nothing more than make Hasselblad sit up and take notice that there is a market for a stripped-down, fast-shooting H camera/back, that's comparable in price to a D3x, or even five grand higher.
For me, Phase has gone off in another direction, chasing megapixels and trying to hit the $100,000 mark for a camera/back. But for Hasselblad, I still have high hopes. But whatever it is, with any brand, it's got to be under $10k for basic kit, out the door. Including floor mats. We all live in a sub-$10k world right now, and it's not going to change any time soon.
-
Hoping specs from highly regarded Pentax K7 (http://www.pentaximaging.com/slr/K-7/) find their way to Pentax 645D.
at the very least:
• 3 inch LCD with 921,000 dot resolution
• Weather, dust and cold resistant
• electronic level function
would be a coup if they implemented
• in-body shake reduction
• sensor cleaning
-
My concern is with the digital side. Mamiya showed us with the ZD backs and camera that it isn't enough to simply put a large Kodak CCD sensor in a body. You also need the secret digital sauce. This is hard earned knowledge which just isn't that easy to come buy. Only Phase One, Hasselblad, Leaf and Leica currently have the expertise to make a high quality state-of-the-art medium format back or body at this time.
Michael
Maybe so, I guess we'll see soon, though I wonder if digital isn't digital. I mean Pentax has been doing digital for quite a while so it's not like Leica or Mamiya (pre Phase One) that had to come in somewhat new and start from scratch.
Back in the pre digital days, about an hour and a half before digital, I tested for my own use the original H, the Contax and the Pentax.
I liked the Pentax, especially the look of the lenses. They were smoother in the graduations that the hard biting Ziess lenses of the Contax, with the H falling somewhere in between.
I also didn't mind the shape, though it wasn't a camera I loved, it was a camera I liked, though I remember in the test it focused faster and more accurately than the other two cameras, but things could have changed since then.
The deal killer of it was the non removable back (once again pre digital) because you had to have a bunch of inserts with looked kind of fragile and the only way to shoot a polaroid was with one of those Forscher backs with the big chunk of optic block.
I think the Polaroid back was $2,800 or more and I thought that was a lot. (Funny how then I thought $2,800 for any back was a lot of money).
Anyway I went with the Contax because it was in rental everywhere (then) and the Contax was a camera I loved, more than liked (if that makes any sense).
Now I don't think rentals are that important because everybody's main backup is a Canon or Nikon anyway, so if this really is 40mpx and it really does sell for $6,500 AND they don't make the medium format mistakes of small buffers, gltichy tethering software with a lot of updates, limited lcds and longggggg wait times on delivery I think it is brilliant.
Still it's the $6,500 thing that makes it interesting, though now that I think about it with my Contax and P30+ I now probably have a $6,500 medium format camera.
Hmm.
BC
P.S. Didn't Mamiya used a 22mpx Dalsa Sensor which was pretty much a past generation by the time it hit the shelves?
-
Didn't Mamiya used a 22mpx Dalsa Sensor which was pretty much a past generation by the time it hit the shelves?
Same larger 36x48 Dalsa 22mpx sensor is now inside current Leaf AptusII-5 at $8K
-
Same larger 36x48 Dalsa 22mpx sensor is now inside current Leaf AptusII-5 at $8K
Didn't mean there was anything wrong with the Dalsa 22mpx sensor. I had it in a Valeo and the first Aptus 22.
It would moire fairly easily and is slow, low iso, but it made a damn pretty file, especially processed in old photoshop CS2.
Personally as long as you don't have moire or artifacts anything equal to 22mpx is fine with me. I have processed the Aptus next to the P30 and couldn't see that much if any difference in detail so . . . it's kind of a wash.
As far as the "secret sauce" of digital, there is no medium format company that at one time or the other hasn't had their issues in processing. Some less than others, but they've all had issues, updates and delays.
Actually when you think about it none of the medium format makers has made a trillion consumer grade cameras. I would think that would be a pretty good learning ground for stepping up to higher end digital capture.
But like Michael and everyone says, until it hits the hands nobody knows.
Still . . . 6,500 bucks . . .
BC
-
.
-
For me, Phase has gone off in another direction, chasing megapixels and trying to hit the $100,000 mark for a camera/back. But for Hasselblad, I still have high hopes. But whatever it is, with any brand, it's got to be under $10k for basic kit, out the door. Including floor mats. We all live in a sub-$10k world right now, and it's not going to change any time soon.
With the Aptus-II 5 Phase/Leaf have the only 22 megapixel sensor in a back still being made new (with full warranty, modern firmware, beautiful LCD, modern speed etc). The Aptus-II comes with a body and lens for $9,990; the system has a proven track record, attractive upgrade paths, and assurance of future development.
Just because Phase One has the only shipping 60 megapixel back (P65+) for the last 18 months does not mean they are only chasing high resolution. They also (re)invented pixel binnning to allow that flagship back to shoot 15 megapixel files at ISO3200 at 1.4 frames per second.
Having a RANGE of digital backs and developing both the low and high ends means better upgrade paths for customers, and the ability to service a broader range of customers.
Doug Peterson ()
__________________
Head of Technical Services, Capture Integration
Phase One, Leaf, Cambo, Canon, Apple, Profoto, Eizo & More
National: 877.217.9870 | Cell: 740.707.2183
Newsletter: Read Latest or Sign Up (http://www.captureintegration.com/our-company/newsletters/)
RSS Feed: Subscribe (http://www.captureintegration.com/2008/08/11/rss-feeds/)
Buy Capture One at 10% off (http://www.captureintegration.com/phase-one/buy-capture-one/)
Personal Work (http://www.doug-peterson.com/)
-
beautiful LCD, modern speed
Beautiful LCD & Modern Speed. Who could argue with those specs. Doug, you seriously could make a great lawyer
-
I've been following the 645D announcements for years (literally)! I'm not sure where the $6500 estimate originated, but the only estimate I've seen from a Pentax spokesperson indicated that they wanted to keep the 645D at one million yen ($11,000). Sorry don't have the reference. But $6500 sounds way too low.
-
That is the key thing right there -- the secret sauce. Do they have it? I have my doubts. (Look at Leica).
There are a million questions.
But without telling David Grover this, my feeling is that this Pentax camera will be a massive success if it does nothing more than make Hasselblad sit up and take notice that there is a market for a stripped-down, fast-shooting H camera/back, that's comparable in price to a D3x, or even five grand higher.
For me, Phase has gone off in another direction, chasing megapixels and trying to hit the $100,000 mark for a camera/back. But for Hasselblad, I still have high hopes. But whatever it is, with any brand, it's got to be under $10k for basic kit, out the door. Including floor mats. We all live in a sub-$10k world right now, and it's not going to change any time soon.
I don't see how Phase One is accused of chasing megapixels when Hasselblad (attempts) to produce the same resolution sensors. Both companies strive to improve their camera systems and add functionality to their products.
Steve Hendrix
-
I've been following the 645D announcements for years (literally)! I'm not sure where the $6500 estimate originated, but the only estimate I've seen from a Pentax spokesperson indicated that they wanted to keep the 645D at one million yen ($11,000). Sorry don't have the reference. But $6500 sounds way too low.
I agree.
When I saw 40MP and $6,500 in the same sentence, I thought - One of those is wrong.
But maybe not, we'll find out Thursday.
I am all for it in either case. Pentax? Sure, why not?
Steve Hendrix
-
With the Aptus-II 5 Phase/Leaf have the only 22 megapixel sensor in a back still being made new (with full warranty, modern firmware, beautiful LCD, modern speed etc). The Aptus-II comes with a body and lens for $9,990; the system has a proven track record, attractive upgrade paths, and assurance of future development.
Just because Phase One has the only shipping 60 megapixel back (P65+) for the last 18 months does not mean they are only chasing high resolution. They also (re)invented pixel binnning to allow that flagship back to shoot 15 megapixel files at ISO3200 at 1.4 frames per second.
Having a RANGE of digital backs and developing both the low and high ends means better upgrade paths for customers, and the ability to service a broader range of customers.
Doug Peterson ()
__________________
Head of Technical Services, Capture Integration
Phase One, Leaf, Cambo, Canon, Apple, Profoto, Eizo & More
National: 877.217.9870 | Cell: 740.707.2183
Newsletter: Read Latest or Sign Up (http://www.captureintegration.com/our-company/newsletters/)
RSS Feed: Subscribe (http://www.captureintegration.com/2008/08/11/rss-feeds/)
Buy Capture One at 10% off (http://www.captureintegration.com/phase-one/buy-capture-one/)
Personal Work (http://www.doug-peterson.com/)
this is the "let's drool over something not announced yet, so we really have no clue but lets drool anyway" thread...
but since you bring it up: the back/camera solution is the same chip that is/was in the failed ZD and they sold it cheaper years ago....at a time when hass (can't believe i am about to say something positive now) is doing the right thing by "buying a market" in dumping old stock H3 31 at 9990 i would not bring up that combo....
phase/leaf should bring that out NOW at 5000 or 6000....get some people to commit...yes it is a great combo but let's face it...who will buy it even at that? used prices are way below that, hass h3d 31 is a much better deal and who knows what this pentax will and can do.....there is no time to find out....
there is a bcooter guy here who is saying what we are hearing from clients NOW and in a year from today we will shake our heads if there is a pro camera without raw video...because once a 30mipx canon/nikon hits with raw video, even the slightest argument about IQ and DR and what not is out the window, unless you really only shoot trees to blow them up to 40x60 or you are just the person who never drives the ferrari over 50mph but just want to have one....
-
this is the "let's drool over something not announced yet, so we really have no clue but lets drool anyway" thread...
but since you bring it up: the back/camera solution is the same chip that is/was in the failed ZD and they sold it cheaper years ago....at a time when hass (can't believe i am about to say something positive now) is doing the right thing by "buying a market" in dumping old stock H3 31 at 9990 i would not bring up that combo....
phase/leaf should bring that out NOW at 5000 or 6000....get some people to commit...yes it is a great combo but let's face it...who will buy it even at that? used prices are way below that, hass h3d 31 is a much better deal and who knows what this pentax will and can do.....there is no time to find out....
there is a bcooter guy here who is saying what we are hearing from clients NOW and in a year from today we will shake our heads if there is a pro camera without raw video...because once a 30mipx canon/nikon hits with raw video, even the slightest argument about IQ and DR and what not is out the window, unless you really only shoot trees to blow them up to 40x60 or you are just the person who never drives the ferrari over 50mph but just want to have one....
The Aptus II 5 has actually been selling very well at $7,995, or $9,995 for the camera bundle.
It has quite a few advantages over an H3DII-31, including larger sensor, ability to go on many cameras, including view cameras effectively, which is not recommended for the 31MP sensor. It is fully supported with Capture One file and tethered compatibility. It is a Dalsa sensor. IMO, it produces more accurate color and captures difficult tones better than the 31MP sensor. It has the most advanced LCD functionality of any digital back on the market. The 31MP sensor shoots nicer high ISO but starts at ISO 100. The Aptus II 5 offers ISO 25, 50, etc. For some, these are pluses.
Not putting down the H3DII-31 (we sell the same chip in the P30+) just saying the Aptus II 5 at it's current price point is generating a lot of interest and moving well, and offers it's own positives. Just not for everyone.
Steve Hendrix
-
there is a bcooter guy here who is saying what we are hearing from clients NOW and in a year from today we will shake our heads if there is a pro camera without raw video...because once a 30mipx canon/nikon hits with raw video, even the slightest argument about IQ and DR and what not is out the window, unless you really only shoot trees to blow them up to 40x60 or you are just the person who never drives the ferrari over 50mph but just want to have one....
[/quote]
I don't want video, I like to shoot trees and I drive my Ferrari faster than 50mph. I guess that there are still a few old people who don't want video.
Steve
-
The Aptus II 5 has actually been selling very well at $7,995, or $9,995 for the camera bundle.
It has quite a few advantages over an H3DII-31, including larger sensor, ability to go on many cameras, including view cameras effectively, which is not recommended for the 31MP sensor. It is fully supported with Capture One file and tethered compatibility. It is a Dalsa sensor. IMO, it produces more accurate color and captures difficult tones better than the 31MP sensor. It has the most advanced LCD functionality of any digital back on the market. The 31MP sensor shoots nicer high ISO but starts at ISO 100. The Aptus II 5 offers ISO 25, 50, etc. For some, these are pluses.
Not putting down the H3DII-31 (we sell the same chip in the P30+) just saying the Aptus II 5 at it's current price point is generating a lot of interest and moving well, and offers it's own positives. Just not for everyone.
Steve Hendrix
i would prefer the larger chip as well....
none of these mount on the rollei and rotate, right?
-
I don't want video, I like to shoot trees and I drive my Ferrari faster than 50mph. I guess that there are still a few old people who don't want video.
I understand, and I think we're going to see a further splitting of the camps here. Down one fork in the road we have:
30"x40", at 300dpi, 16bit, Adobe98RGB.
And down the other road, we have The Working Chumps, who, in the near future will need only:
1024 pixels wide, at 72dpi, 8bit, at 24fps, sRGB.
That is quite the fork in the road. But my position is: Hasselblad hopefully would fulfill both customers. Although I guess, with CCD, they're going to have a tough time delivering video.
-
It is listed on the DPreview main page. $9,400 worth o yen.
-
announcement link - $9.4k (http://www.dpreview.com/news/1003/10031002pentax645d.asp)
-
Old fashion MLU dedicated button in a totally modern japanese-style digital 40mp MF body for $9K usd!
I must be dreaming!
Eduardo
-
can anyone find in the specs that it will be able to use the older leaf shutter lenses (as leaf shutter).?
-
DNG
11 point af
weatherproof with 70 seals
accepts ALL pentax lenses (also leaf shuttter?)
14bit
200-1000iso (expand to 100-1600)
a new designed, announced, weather proof 55mm 2.8 medium format lens FOR 1100$?
jpeg with looks in camera
3" 920000 pixel sceen
dust removal mechanism!
800 shots on one battery
this sounds like a canon/nikon with a large CCD sensor!
japan only for now....can this be some kind of kodak political thing (we'll give you the sensor but you can't sell it in EU and USA)?......start the imports
-
I hope most didn't miss this line from the press release ........
The camera will initially be available only in the Japanese market at a suggested retail price of ¥850,000 (~ US $9,400) from May 2010.
-
there is a bcooter guy here who is saying what we are hearing from clients NOW and in a year from today we will shake our heads if there is a pro camera without raw video...because once a 30mipx canon/nikon hits with raw video, even the slightest argument about IQ and DR and what not is out the window, unless you really only shoot trees to blow them up to 40x60 or you are just the person who never drives the ferrari over 50mph but just want to have one....
Yep. All photographers everywhere will have to shoot raw video and will have to shoot it with the same camera as they shoot their macro product photography, location high-sync-speed fashion, nighttime architectural shots, and studio portraits.
Either that or photography will continue to be a spectrum of different specialists, generalists, owners, and renters and various types of equipment will still be the best tool for various types of shooters and various types of shooting.
Doug Peterson ()
__________________
Head of Technical Services, Capture Integration
Phase One, Leaf, Cambo, Canon, Apple, Profoto, Eizo & More
National: 877.217.9870 | Cell: 740.707.2183
Newsletter: Read Latest or Sign Up (http://www.captureintegration.com/our-company/newsletters/)
RSS Feed: Subscribe (http://www.captureintegration.com/2008/08/11/rss-feeds/)
Buy Capture One at 10% off (http://www.captureintegration.com/phase-one/buy-capture-one/)
Personal Work (http://www.doug-peterson.com/)
-
In the old 645 film days and with current Pentax APS SLR's street price was about 10%
less than MSRP.
So after the furor dies this could be an $8500 camera,
That would make it very competitive, especially if the HDR feature works well...
-
Yep. All photographers everywhere will have to shoot raw video and will have to shoot it with the same camera as they shoot their macro product photography, location high-sync-speed fashion, nighttime architectural shots, and studio portraits.
Either that or photography will continue to be a spectrum of different specialists, generalists, owners, and renters and various types of equipment will still be the best tool for various types of shooters and various types of shooting.
Doug Peterson ()
__________________
Head of Technical Services, Capture Integration
Phase One, Leaf, Cambo, Canon, Apple, Profoto, Eizo & More
National: 877.217.9870 | Cell: 740.707.2183
Newsletter: Read Latest or Sign Up (http://www.captureintegration.com/our-company/newsletters/)
RSS Feed: Subscribe (http://www.captureintegration.com/2008/08/11/rss-feeds/)
Buy Capture One at 10% off (http://www.captureintegration.com/phase-one/buy-capture-one/)
Personal Work (http://www.doug-peterson.com/)
it's not about having to shoot video...or even wanting to....the 5DII is proof that video was an afterthought for canon as well....
it's not like you decide to get a cell phone because it does NOT let you check your email.....
we have no clue what this pentax is really like, but just from the specs we can tell that these guys really read what people actually want in a DMF camera....we will see how it plays out but i don't know why this pentax should be a dud....
and just like they put in 11 AF points, a DSLR like LCD, weather proofing, DNG and sensor cleaning while going head to head with nikon/canon.... and seem to be willing to keep the lenses within reach as well, they just might through in video in the next version....
i also think that photography USED to be a field as wide as you are describing with tools as wide ranging....
now the only option larger then 35mm we have is 2 different systems based on 645, with only a few sensors even close to fullfilling even that promise.....
the specialists, generalists, owners and renters you are referring to can choose between....a barely 645 mamiya or barely 645 hasselblad...no WLF anymore (without a vertical image the hass option does not really count)....
and again: i don't see how throwing video into the mix takes anything AWAY from these very generic options....
you might have noticed that i asked steve a question before: can i put the larger 22 mpix leaf 5 on a rollei? and rotate the back? i know i can put it on a RZ...i have been down that road....it makes you cry every time you look down that beautiful WLF only to see it cropped to death.....there are no options anymore....
and i know that phase backs can be put on the rollei via special order...not sure if they rotate.....but either way, i won't shoot a back anymore that locks me into one software, no matter how solid it is....workflow is so much more then raw conversion....
-
"a large 3.0-inch color LCD monitor with approximately 921,000 dots" -- that's going to make some people on this forum very happy.
I wonder when it'll be available outside Japan.
-
In the old 645 film days and with current Pentax APS SLR's street price was about 10%
less than MSRP.
So after the furor dies this could be an $8500 camera,
That would make it very competitive, especially if the HDR feature works well...
Why would they need an HDR feature in the first place since it is the same sensor used by the H4D40???
Cheers,
Bernard
-
The most interesting tid-bit so far is that the ISO in the specs listed by dpreview is 200-1000, suggesting an entirely new sensor, perhaps?
Like Michael said, the "digital magic" inside the camera is as important as the hardware but, unlike Mamiya and Contax, who both blew digital quite spectacularly, pentax is a proven performer with years of experience. The imagine-engine in this camera appears to be adapted from their 35mm line-up, which bodes well for image quality and system performance/stability.
Also interesting that put automatic sensor cleaning on it - another MF first.
Let the games begin....my 100-300 FA zoom can't wait to meet the 645D
- N.
-
The specs on the new Pentax are pretty impressive..can't wait for reports of end user experience.
http://www.dpreview.com/news/1003/10031002pentax645d.asp (http://www.dpreview.com/news/1003/10031002pentax645d.asp)
Steve
-
The more I look at these specs I wonder... isn't this the rumored Nikon MF camera?
I have a hard time believing that Pentax managed to develop all these breakthrough technologies by themselves:
- First MF dust removal
- First MF multi-point AF
- First MF weather sealing
- First MF high resolution screen
- First MF camera usable in real outdoor conditions including very cold weather
- ...
Cheers,
Bernard
-
What about the 11 point AF? I thought it was impossible to even have 3 point AF according to other MF manufactures?
Pentax has always made great stuff under market value of the other MF companies and seem to be continuing the tradition with the 645D. I can't wait it for it to be availble in the us, or at least English menu versions available gray market.
-
The specs on the new Pentax are pretty impressive..can't wait for reports of end user experience.
http://www.dpreview.com/news/1003/10031002pentax645d.asp (http://www.dpreview.com/news/1003/10031002pentax645d.asp)
Steve
Having never purchased a gray market camera before, how long the wait til one could find a source, and would one really want to spend 10K on a new un-proven or first series design?
Not sure it would be worth the potential headache, but it would be worth the K's if it were sold here...
-
As I repeatedly said, Pentax MF lenses are second to none. Many did not believe the MF lenses can out-resolve high pixel density 35mm DSLR sensor, but since I posted this (Pentax 67 90-180mm/f5.6 zoom on 5DII sensor, full frame resolution chart, 100% pixel) all was silence...
http://forums.dpreview.com/...ms/readflat....essage=30708870 (http://forums.dpreview.com/...ms/readflat.asp?forum=1021&message=30708870)
For example, the P645 35mm is much better than the Mamiya or Contax counterparts, while my P67 55mm/f4 and 300mm/f4 (ED IF) are my sharpest optics, cross all the formats.
From my landscape work point of view, the serious omission of 645D is no Live View. With recent Nikon and Canon I never look through viewfinder anymore. DOF, super-fine error-free focus, exposure, framing, straightening horizon, ...., everything is live view, just treat the LCD a small ground glass and zooming as the loupe.
-
The more I look at these specs I wonder... isn't this the rumored Nikon MF camera?
I have a hard time believing that Pentax managed to develop all these breakthrough technologies by themselves:
- First MF dust removal
- First MF multi-point AF
- First MF weather sealing
- First MF high resolution screen
- First MF camera usable in real outdoor conditions including very cold weather
- ...
Cheers,
Bernard
You know Pentax has been making cameras for a while now?
All those technologies you list are technologies that have previously appeared in Pentax's APS-C lineup. The dust removal? Olympus did it first, Pentax and everyone else have developed their own since. The multi-point AF? It's an adaptation of the AF in the DSLRs, and it's mentioned that they made some modifications to the 645D's optical path to enable it. Doesn't sound like Nikon work to me. Weathersealing? Pentax has the broadest available combination of weathersealed bodies and lenses across the whole price range. The high-resolution screen has been seen on the K-7, as far as I know (and plenty of other DSLRs as well). And finally, the K-7 has the distinction of being the only DSLR in its class (or possibly at all) to be rated for extremely low temperature work.
None of that is so hard to believe if you ask me. I don't see the hand of Nikon in there anywhere. Don't be afraid to give credit where the credit's due. Pentax may be a relatively small force in today's market, but back in the day they first popularized the SLR, before those young guns like Canon and Nikon came in and stepped up the game.
-
From my landscape work point of view, the serious omission of 645D is no Live View. With recent Nikon and Canon I never look through viewfinder anymore. DOF, super-fine error-free focus, exposure, framing, straightening horizon, ...., everything is live view, just treat the LCD a small ground glass and zooming as the loupe.
Yep... same thing here... AF and the naked eye are not always reliable enough with these resolutions (they sometimes are).
Cheers,
Bernard
-
You know Pentax has been making cameras for a while now?
All those technologies you list are technologies that have previously appeared in Pentax's APS-C lineup. The dust removal? Olympus did it first, Pentax and everyone else have developed their own since. The multi-point AF? It's an adaptation of the AF in the DSLRs, and it's mentioned that they made some modifications to the 645D's optical path to enable it. Doesn't sound like Nikon work to me. Weathersealing? Pentax has the broadest available combination of weathersealed bodies and lenses across the whole price range. The high-resolution screen has been seen on the K-7, as far as I know (and plenty of other DSLRs as well). And finally, the K-7 has the distinction of being the only DSLR in its class (or possibly at all) to be rated for extremely low temperature work.
None of that is so hard to believe if you ask me. I don't see the hand of Nikon in there anywhere. Don't be afraid to give credit where the credit's due. Pentax may be a relatively small force in today's market, but back in the day they first popularized the SLR, before those young guns like Canon and Nikon came in and stepped up the game.
Yes, you are probably correct.
Splendid specs anyway!
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Pentax may be a relatively small force in today's market,
*******
Maybe in the camera market but Hoya wanted them for their other "optical' divisions exp. medical; endoscopes etc. I think of Hoya as a manufacturer of camera filters but their sales are ~$3 billion a year including special glass for the National Ignition Facility at Lawrence Livermore.
Steve
-
Groundglass is 1.7x bigger and if AF specs deliver...
Ed
Yes, you are probably correct.
Splendid specs anyway!
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Pentax may be a relatively small force in today's market,
*******
Maybe in the camera market but Hoya wanted them for their other "optical' divisions exp. medical; endoscopes etc. I think of Hoya as a manufacturer of camera filters but their sales are ~$3 billion a year including special glass for the National Ignition Facility at Lawrence Livermore.
Steve
...not to mention supplying most of the glass elements for most of the lens manufacturers aside from Canon. A lot more going on there than just filters...
Hoya did also acquire Pentax for its camera division and they've been very agressive in reforming the company to make it profitable. So far they've been successful, as their figures are now in the black. Unfortunately, all that bargain Pentax glass that people like me bought into the company for in the first place has risen in price to costs on par or higher than the competition, which is why I'm looking at Canon for the lenses I want in the future... I'll still keep my Pentax to use with old K-mount glass though.
-
This link leads to Google translation (quite readable) of the Pentax 645D FAQ on their Japanese site:
http://translate.google.com/translate?js=y...sl=ja&tl=en (http://translate.google.com/translate?js=y&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&layout=1&eotf=1&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.pentax.jp%2Fjapan%2Fimaging%2Fdigital%2Fmedium%2F645d%2Ffaq.html&sl=ja&tl=en)
-
As I repeatedly said, Pentax MF lenses are second to none. Many did not believe the MF lenses can out-resolve high pixel density 35mm DSLR sensor, but since I posted this (Pentax 67 90-180mm/f5.6 zoom on 5DII sensor, full frame resolution chart, 100% pixel) all was silence...
http://forums.dpreview.com/...ms/readflat....essage=30708870 (http://forums.dpreview.com/...ms/readflat.asp?forum=1021&message=30708870)
For example, the P645 35mm is much better than the Mamiya or Contax counterparts, while my P67 55mm/f4 and 300mm/f4 (ED IF) are my sharpest optics, cross all the formats.
From my landscape work point of view, the serious omission of 645D is no Live View. With recent Nikon and Canon I never look through viewfinder anymore. DOF, super-fine error-free focus, exposure, framing, straightening horizon, ...., everything is live view, just treat the LCD a small ground glass and zooming as the loupe.
I'm not surprised by your assertion that the pentax MF lenses out resolve 35mm DSLR lenses and sensors. I've not used pentax anything but based on my tests with the ixpress 528c multishot back, my Rollei 6000 series lenses are out resolving the sensor even in microstep mode which gives an effective sensor spacing of 4.5 microns - less than the DSLR sensel spacing. This is only true at apertures wider than about f/8 with the microstep - and something like f/16 and wider for the multishot. I am really intrigued by the praise the pentax glass gets. Mostly it seems people are raving about the optics for the 67 series not as much for the 645. Will both lenses fit on the new body or only the 645 ones?
-
Yes it is in the FAQ. 67 lens through an adaptor is fine, some functions (AF confirmation with the center sensor) will work.
As far as my original reservation on live view goes, now I learned CCD sensors and live view do not go together.
Another thing to worry is the production rate is only 500 a month according to the Pentax Japanese site. Good luck snap one!
Mostly it seems people are raving about the optics for the 67 series not as much for the 645. Will both lenses fit on the new body or only the 645 ones?
-
It's funny how that body design, which I never liked for film, seems to make so much more sense in a digital package.
And a housing not made of plastic? Nice.
The only real bummer I see is USB. But maybe in-camera JPEGs will mean USB will be fine. The RAWs could just stay on the card(s).
Whatever. I'm interested. Lotta stuff in here that we've been told many times for a while now just couldn't be done. Go figure.
-
you might have noticed that i asked steve a question before: can i put the larger 22 mpix leaf 5 on a rollei? and rotate the back? i know i can put it on a RZ...i have been down that road....it makes you cry every time you look down that beautiful WLF only to see it cropped to death.....there are no options anymore....
and i know that phase backs can be put on the rollei via special order...not sure if they rotate.....but either way, i won't shoot a back anymore that locks me into one software, no matter how solid it is....workflow is so much more then raw conversion....
No, Leaf won't fit to Rollei, only option there would be Sinar (also rotating). About Phase: the backs are fixed at the body, so far I know even not removable for using somewhere else. And not rotating. So for you only option is Sinar or a used AFI-II...
Andreas
-
Yep. All photographers everywhere will have to shoot raw video and will have to shoot it with the same camera as they shoot their macro product photography, location high-sync-speed fashion, nighttime architectural shots, and studio portraits.
...snip...
No, not everyone shoots the same thing.
That's obvious, though this response reminds me of the comments I heard when I moved from film to digital. Lab's said, "our photographers only shoot film", or digital has a place, "but it's really not there for high end advertising".
In other words digital capture was something they just didn't want to talk about, much like camera makers that only make still cameras do not want to talk about motion.
There is no holy grail when it comes to imagery for commerce. 8x10 film is no more pure than a dx digital image, as long as the image is compelling and serves a purpose. The same can be said for still to motion. Neither one is more relevant, more traditional or more important.
Only two groups decide that . . . the artist and the people that pay the artist.
As far as the one camera fits all, no I don't think that's necessarily true or even the plan, but it's nice to have the option.
I wouldn't think about shooting stills or motion without the appropriate backups on set (for both) but then again I would much rather own (and pay for) a third camera that could back up both.
That's just good business.
But speaking of business and the Pentax if I was in the buyer's market for a 40 million pixel still camera I'd have to take a hard look at a 1 million yen camera with a high def screen, shoots raw and jpeg, is weather sealed and has dust removal vs. a traditional 2 million yen camera.
That's also good business.
IMO
BC
-
That's obvious, though this response reminds me of the comments I heard when I moved from film to digital. Lab's said, "our photographers only shoot film", or digital has a place, "but it's really not there for high end advertising".
In other words digital capture was something they just didn't want to talk about, much like camera makers that only make still cameras do not want to talk about motion.
I think this is a key point that Master Cooter is making. All the labs lived in denial about digital, and then the tsunami washed over them, almost overnight. The pro lab in my town is now a Ghost Town, almost overnight. They never saw it coming.
I don't want to think that video would have the same effect, on the same time frame. But yes, if you saw that iPad TV spot, during The Oscars, it almost sent a chill up your spine, thinking that the publishers are chomping at the bit to publish electronically, and avoid the paper publishing overhead. I watched that iPad spot, and my jaw dropped, wondering just exactly what the time frame is for that thing to truly catch on. And how much do you think they'll value stills for that device, next to video? Don't answer that question.
-
Wow-if they can actually produce this thing, they're onto something. US market prices (when they get it here) are often lower than Japanese home market, so we might be looking at a camera that costs roughly as much as a D3x, but has 1.5x the pixels, a similar degree of weathersealing (although perhaps not the lenses - I don't think Pentax 645 lenses were weathersealed, and even if the new ones are, it'll take Pentax a bit to update their line), and has AF that is more akin to a DSLR than to anything else in MF. This has the potential (again, if it can actually be built) to affect both high-end DSLR sales and the low end and midrange of the MF marketplace! Of course, an impressive prototype, even if fully functional, doesn't mean they can deliver significant quantities of cameras - at least twice as many models of digital MF cameras must have been announced as ever shipped, and there's some question as to whether anyone save Hassy, Phase and Leaf has ever REALLY shipped one in quantity (yes, a few Sinars got out, a few Mamiya ZDs, and a tiny number of S2s so far, but the numbers on all three are so small that they are almost not real products - only the S2 is still an open question, being so new that we don't know how many will be made).
-
I like the dual SD cards feature, I could use 1 SD card for Raw's and the other for tethering JPEG's (USB) for revision, I could even use a EYE-Fi SD card for wireless tethering those JPEG'S to my assistant laptop for close up revision.
Here's some image samples of the 645D (http://www.camera-pentax.jp/645d/top.html) (first button on left "impression" and then click on the feather button in the photographer profile) or 1 (http://www.camera-pentax.jp/645d/photo/01.jpg) 2 (http://www.camera-pentax.jp/645d/photo/02.jpg) 3 (http://www.camera-pentax.jp/645d/photo/03.jpg) 4 (http://www.camera-pentax.jp/645d/photo/04.jpg) 5 (http://www.camera-pentax.jp/645d/photo/05.jpg) 6 (http://www.camera-pentax.jp/645d/photo/06.jpg) 7 (http://www.camera-pentax.jp/645d/photo/02.jpg) 8 (http://www.camera-pentax.jp/645d/photo/08.jpg)
-
can someone fill me in about the older pentax 645. ive never had any interest in pentax in the film days as it never had removable backs. but im interested in this camera...
did the last film pentax 645 have AF? if so, will these work on this camera?
or is the only option of getting a whole range of lenses at this stage just manual focus?
cheers paul
-
Of course, an impressive prototype, even if fully functional, doesn't mean they can deliver significant quantities of cameras
I don't believe that Pentax would take the risk to announce a May availability if they didn't have production line versions of the camera already available today.
The 2 months period is most probably just a safety buffer for final software validation and testing.
They could of course still find some late issues, but as was pointed out elsewhere, they have a lot of experience with mass production of DSLR that are using similar technologies.
The fact that it uses a larger sensor doesn't change much really for companies that are expert in manufacturing like Pentax is. The only open question is with color casts, etc... since the Kodak sensors are known to pose issues in some cases.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
I wonder if they'll support leaf shutter lenses in the future...
-
On paper it has nice spec's for what it is. Nothing that shyed me directly away. Let's see what reviews say that will pop-up next few days/weeks and if and when they start to ship to US/EU.
I would be temped by this system, for 95% of my type of photography I don't need high-iso, fast framerates, very long tele or versatile zooms like in 35mm. But I would welcome more detail/resolution and 'smoothness' as seen in many/most MF systems. Current offerings in the same league are for me out of the question money wise, not willing to pay that kind of money, but with the pentax, still a lot of money I could convince myself....
On the other hand I could upgrade in 1 or 2 years to the next iteration of nikon/canon's that probably will move to 30'sh mpx sensors and have then a more all round system
Choices Choices Choices
-
This is certainly the game-changer I believe Bernard was hoping for earlier in the thread. I can see the biggest impact being in the MFDB world, but if
this Pentax is the beast the specs and pricing suggest, it will be a contender against high-end dSLR market as well.
This is actually the only MFDB I would consider, even though it's still a bit out of my price range. I could see myself moving from crop sensor dSLR right to MFDB if the Pentax delivers what it promises. And offers multi-minute exposures with low shadow noise at base ISO.
If and when Pentax can deliver this camera in reasonable volumes globally, it will cause serious price pressures on P1 and Hasselblad. But the big question is what will be the response from Canikon later this year? Will we finally see the Nikon S2 equivalent?
-
About Phase: the backs are fixed at the body, so far I know even not removable for using somewhere else.
No, Phase backs aren't permanently attached to their body or anyone else's.
-
If it proofs to be a succes and if pentax did not taylor the design too much to the specific sensor, even if it not has a removable back, we might see higher mpx version too by replacing the sensor pcb and a few other components.
A good hint could be when someone discovers that the finder is masked off and the mirror is bigger then needed just for 44x33 chipsize. If I had to design such camera I would for shure think about that.
dammit :-) it isn't yet here in the west and we already think about future versions.
-
If it proofs to be a succes and if pentax did not taylor the design too much to the specific sensor, even if it not has a removable back, we might see higher mpx version too by replacing the sensor pcb and a few other components.
A good hint could be when someone discovers that the finder is masked off and the mirror is bigger then needed just for 44x33 chipsize. If I had to design such camera I would for shure think about that.
dammit :-) it isn't yet here in the west and we already think about future versions.
At this pricing, they may be the last firm standing. Brand H and P priced high when sensors were expensive, and now have systems which simply cost too much.
Edmund
-
At this pricing, they may be the last firm standing. Brand H and P priced high when sensors were expensive, and now have systems which simply cost too much.
Not to mention Brand "L"
-
Another thing to worry is the production rate is only 500 a month according to the Pentax Japanese site. Good luck snap one!
500 x 12 months = 6,000 units per year potentially
would be trumping existing MFD market shipping upwards of 8,000 units per year
-
It's not clear to me
if the Pentax 645D will capture tethered into computer?
-
I like the dual SD cards feature, I could use 1 SD card for Raw's and the other for tethering JPEG's (USB) for revision, I could even use a EYE-Fi SD card for wireless tethering those JPEG'S to my assistant laptop for close up revision.
I've been curious about this for quite a while
and haven't seen any demonstrations or videos showing how quickly a JPEG would wirelessly transfer to computer,
and how easy it would be to set up connection between computer and Eye-Fi card.
-
At this pricing, they may be the last firm standing. Brand H and P priced high when sensors were expensive, and now have systems which simply cost too much.
Edmund
If they managed to have this "agressive" pricing without compromising performance/quality/IQ and still be on par (or very close to) with H and P, yes then it has the potential to hurt a few competitors out there....but whether it will overtake with a landslide....most likely this camera is foremost appealing to new-comers to MF that have not yet invested or those that return from high-end 35mm SLR's
Even though the price is substantially lower then we were used to (cough, i never got used to these price levels anyway) it's still quite some substantial money. It starts just above the price level of Nikon and Canon flagships and probably will unit wise sell less than these DSLR's (and thos units aren't nowhere near those like a D700 and 5D).
I could well be that even at this low price it doesn't sell enough.
-
If it proofs to be a succes and if pentax did not taylor the design too much to the specific sensor, even if it not has a removable back, we might see higher mpx version too by replacing the sensor pcb and a few other components.
A good hint could be when someone discovers that the finder is masked off and the mirror is bigger then needed just for 44x33 chipsize. If I had to design such camera I would for shure think about that.
dammit :-) it isn't yet here in the west and we already think about future versions.
Do they even need to accommodate a larger sensor? With the advances made in sensor performance/size, could 33x44 be where the development's going? I believe I read here once that it's a lot less difficult to manufacture than a larger sensor (by quite a bit more than the surface area would indicate - I think it requires significantly less stitching - maybe it can be done with one stitch, while the 36x48 has to be stitched in both directions?). This WOULD require them to come out with one lens that is wider than anything they have now (a 35 is as wide as they go, while 33x44 really benefits from a 28, or if they want to shock everyone, a 24). They don't have the same worry about legacy lens collections as Phamiya or Hasselblad, simply because there haven't BEEN many Pentax 645s in active use recently - this is a camera that is meant to capture high-end DSLR users, NOT to digitalize existing MF systems. I hope we see it outside Japan.
I wouldn't want to be Canon right now, at least on the 1Ds 4 front, trapped between the D3x and this thing! Realistically, the Pentax will enter into just about every buying decision on a very high-end DSLR (some of which are also complicated by the M9). Not every 1Ds4/D3x buyer will choose the Pentax instead, but they'll all give it a close look. It MAY have the effect of not letting Sony into the really high end of the market, if they had any interest. I'd think it a rare buyer indeed who opted for a hypothetical $6000-$8000 Sony over the lens line security of Nikon or Canon OR the larger sensor offered by Pentax (unless the Sony had RED-level video, which would really stir up he market). THAT would be an interesting $6000-$10000 camera market!
1 rangefinder not that much larger than a G11, but with superb image quality - don't even think about video, you don't have AUTOFOCUS (Leica M9)
2 full system DSLRs with no or limited video(D3x/1Ds4)
1 DSLR with a more limited lens system, BUT with raw video (Sony "Alpha 1000")
1 or 2 medium-format systems with ultimate image quality, but less versatility (Pentax and maybe last year's Hasselblad - they're promoting the H3DII-31 under $10k right now)...
-
Dan,
I can do no more then agree with your response to my post.
In my defence I was just looking at litlle bit more short term: the 50 and 60mpx version that are on the kodak shelf too.
With enough demand undoubtfully companies that make wafersteppers could introduce one's that allow bigger masks and do away with stitching (Is'nt canon doing that already for the sensor in the 5D?) and increase yield.
Actually, the Pentax, even premature as it is, did shake up my descision making process for buying a new camera next year. I went from film medium format back to APS DSLR....long story....and want to buy I high quality camera but Digital MF until today was just no option, the pentax changed that, while it still is a heck-of-lot-of-money I might convice myself as I hardly can see what I would need/want more in many years to come than this one from pentax.
Do they even need to accommodate a larger sensor? With the advances made in sensor performance/size, could 33x44 be where the development's going? I believe I read here once that it's a lot less difficult to manufacture than a larger sensor (by quite a bit more than the surface area would indicate - I think it requires significantly less stitching - maybe it can be done with one stitch, while the 36x48 has to be stitched in both directions?). This WOULD require them to come out with one lens that is wider than anything they have now (a 35 is as wide as they go, while 33x44 really benefits from a 28, or if they want to shock everyone, a 24). They don't have the same worry about legacy lens collections as Phamiya or Hasselblad, simply because there haven't BEEN many Pentax 645s in active use recently - this is a camera that is meant to capture high-end DSLR users, NOT to digitalize existing MF systems. I hope we see it outside Japan.
I wouldn't want to be Canon right now, at least on the 1Ds 4 front, trapped between the D3x and this thing! Realistically, the Pentax will enter into just about every buying decision on a very high-end DSLR (some of which are also complicated by the M9). Not every 1Ds4/D3x buyer will choose the Pentax instead, but they'll all give it a close look. It MAY have the effect of not letting Sony into the really high end of the market, if they had any interest. I'd think it a rare buyer indeed who opted for a hypothetical $6000-$8000 Sony over the lens line security of Nikon or Canon OR the larger sensor offered by Pentax (unless the Sony had RED-level video, which would really stir up he market). THAT would be an interesting $6000-$10000 camera market!
1 rangefinder not that much larger than a G11, but with superb image quality - don't even think about video, you don't have AUTOFOCUS (Leica M9)
2 full system DSLRs with no or limited video(D3x/1Ds4)
1 DSLR with a more limited lens system, BUT with raw video (Sony "Alpha 1000")
1 or 2 medium-format systems with ultimate image quality, but less versatility (Pentax and maybe last year's Hasselblad - they're promoting the H3DII-31 under $10k right now)...
-
It's not clear to me
if the Pentax 645D will capture tethered into computer?
Good question. The chose DNG and didn't mention a dedicated processing/tethering application in a press release which otherwise seems pretty detailed. That implies they won't have their own processing/tethering application. Of course this is just another announcement so it's hard to gauge such details.
-
I would think the 645D is aimed at the Japanese wedding market, which is big business in Japan. I wonder how long it will take Nikon and Canon to respond.
If US pricing is $8k, with a lens, then its on. Hassel/Phamiya/Leica will be hard pressed to justify their current prices, even the Aptus II 5 with a Phase DF's list price of under $10k seams stupid high when compared to the Pentax. This assumes that everything works as advertised, but this isn't some fidly European company with 20 employees, this is a big Japanese company with big money behind it. I think they have the will, the patents, and the cash for R&D, and they know how to build cameras.
As for secret sauce, the Pentax dslr products are tight packages, produce a nice file. I think their know-how should scale up nicely.
-
I would think the 645D is aimed at the Japanese wedding market, which is big business in Japan. I wonder how long it will take Nikon and Canon to respond.
If US pricing is $8k, with a lens, then its on. Hassel/Phamiya/Leica will be hard pressed to justify their current prices, even the Aptus II 5 with a Phase DF's list price of under $10k seams stupid high when compared to the Pentax. This assumes that everything works as advertised, but this isn't some fidly European company with 20 employees, this is a big Japanese company with big money behind it. I think they have the will, the patents, and the cash for R&D, and they know how to build cameras.
As for secret sauce, the Pentax dslr products are tight packages, produce a nice file. I think their know-how should scale up nicely.
I couldn't agree more...maybe not the way I would make a camera but I like woodsailboats and prewar arms, so they aren't making these things for my aesthetic, however at that price I am interested to see what it really is and what their system entails.
-
I couldn't agree more...maybe not the way I would make a camera but I like woodsailboats and prewar arms, so they aren't making these things for my aesthetic, however at that price I am interested to see what it really is and what their system entails.
Usually with an announcement comes sample images. Are there any to be found?
-
It's not clear to me
if the Pentax 645D will capture tethered into computer?
Good question. The chose DNG and didn't mention a dedicated processing/tethering application in a press release which otherwise seems pretty detailed. That implies they won't have their own processing/tethering application. Of course this is just another announcement so it's hard to gauge such details.
Okay, I've sent off an email to http://www.sofortbildapp.com/ (http://www.sofortbildapp.com/) asking for Pentax 645D support.
-
Usually with an announcement comes sample images. Are there any to be found?
Posted earlier (http://luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?s=&showtopic=40789&view=findpost&p=352243):
http://www.camera-pentax.jp/645d/photo/01.jpg (http://www.camera-pentax.jp/645d/photo/01.jpg)
http://www.camera-pentax.jp/645d/photo/02.jpg (http://www.camera-pentax.jp/645d/photo/02.jpg)
http://www.camera-pentax.jp/645d/photo/03.jpg (http://www.camera-pentax.jp/645d/photo/03.jpg)
http://www.camera-pentax.jp/645d/photo/04.jpg (http://www.camera-pentax.jp/645d/photo/04.jpg)
http://www.camera-pentax.jp/645d/photo/05.jpg (http://www.camera-pentax.jp/645d/photo/05.jpg)
http://www.camera-pentax.jp/645d/photo/06.jpg (http://www.camera-pentax.jp/645d/photo/06.jpg)
http://www.camera-pentax.jp/645d/photo/07.jpg (http://www.camera-pentax.jp/645d/photo/07.jpg)
http://www.camera-pentax.jp/645d/photo/08.jpg (http://www.camera-pentax.jp/645d/photo/08.jpg)
-
The chose DNG
DNG or PEF - choice is yours.
and didn't mention a dedicated processing/tethering application in a press release which otherwise seems pretty detailed. That implies they won't have their own processing/tethering application. Of course this is just another announcement so it's hard to gauge such details.
they used to make "PENTAX REMOTE Assistant" software ( http://www.pentax.jp/english/support/digit...t_k10d_win.html (http://www.pentax.jp/english/support/digital/remoteassistant_k10d_win.html) ) , but that was abandoned after K10D/K20D... K7 is not there...
-
I've been curious about this for quite a while
and haven't seen any demonstrations or videos showing how quickly a JPEG would wirelessly transfer to computer,
and how easy it would be to set up connection between computer and Eye-Fi card.
the new eye-fi cards have "N" standard so transmission is fast...
-
Do they even need to accommodate a larger sensor? With the advances made in sensor performance/size, could 33x44 be where the development's going? I believe I read here once that it's a lot less difficult to manufacture than a larger sensor (by quite a bit more than the surface area would indicate - I think it requires significantly less stitching - maybe it can be done with one stitch, while the 36x48 has to be stitched in both directions?). This WOULD require them to come out with one lens that is wider than anything they have now (a 35 is as wide as they go, while 33x44 really benefits from a 28, or if they want to shock everyone, a 24). They don't have the same worry about legacy lens collections as Phamiya or Hasselblad, simply because there haven't BEEN many Pentax 645s in active use recently - this is a camera that is meant to capture high-end DSLR users, NOT to digitalize existing MF systems. I hope we see it outside Japan.
I wouldn't want to be Canon right now, at least on the 1Ds 4 front, trapped between the D3x and this thing! Realistically, the Pentax will enter into just about every buying decision on a very high-end DSLR (some of which are also complicated by the M9). Not every 1Ds4/D3x buyer will choose the Pentax instead, but they'll all give it a close look. It MAY have the effect of not letting Sony into the really high end of the market, if they had any interest. I'd think it a rare buyer indeed who opted for a hypothetical $6000-$8000 Sony over the lens line security of Nikon or Canon OR the larger sensor offered by Pentax (unless the Sony had RED-level video, which would really stir up he market). THAT would be an interesting $6000-$10000 camera market!
1 rangefinder not that much larger than a G11, but with superb image quality - don't even think about video, you don't have AUTOFOCUS (Leica M9)
2 full system DSLRs with no or limited video(D3x/1Ds4)
1 DSLR with a more limited lens system, BUT with raw video (Sony "Alpha 1000")
1 or 2 medium-format systems with ultimate image quality, but less versatility (Pentax and maybe last year's Hasselblad - they're promoting the H3DII-31 under $10k right now)...
in the specs for the new announced 55 lens it says that the lens does not work on film pentax bodies as it won't cover the area....so i guess the answer is there....
-
Usually with an announcement comes sample images. Are there any to be found?
Check out AldoMurillo's Post#170 on Page#9 (previous page). think Sample images from the camera are quite nice.
ps >Sorry. Ididn't catch "BJNY"'s reply.My bad for the duplication in reply.
-
the new eye-fi cards have "N" standard so transmission is fast...
I'd like to see:
• how easy for user to set up connection between computer and camera
• how many seconds later does image appear on computer display
Has anyone tried "N" speed Eye-Fi card in SD slot of Canon 1ds3?
-
the new eye-fi cards have "N" standard so transmission is fast...
This would be a way cooler setup than a cable tether. I wonder if we could build a basic folder structure on the camera. Does anyone make a Firewire or better SDHC card reader? The "RAW" card will have to come out of the camera eventually.
-
I wouldn't want to be Canon right now, at least on the 1Ds 4 front, trapped between the D3x and this thing...
Yeah, in fact, I think this puts both the 1Dsiii (and its successor) and D3x in a bad position, as well as a lot of MFD, because there has been a one-two punch from both Sony and Pentax against these lines. We've now got the Sony A850 for under $2k and this new MFD Pentax for under $10K. We are finally starting to see a bit of a shift towards the film days, where the buy-in for high end imaging, while still not cheap, isn't prohibitively expensive.
-
Okay, I've sent off an email to http://www.sofortbildapp.com/ (http://www.sofortbildapp.com/) asking for Pentax 645D support.
I would be surprised if there is not some kind of tethered support for this camera, but the Japanese can stubbornly surprise you.
All they really need is something simple like eos utility and adobe support.
We routinely tether to eos and run bridge in the background, for sorting, checking focus, renaming and rating and do it all on a previous generation macbookpro hooked to a 23" monitor. EOS utility gives you a full screen preview and with bridge, we reads raws, jpegs and video. So far it's been stable and the learning curve is easy.
Working in bridge keeps it simple and if you really want to show an AD a closer to the final look, just double click to camera raw with a preset and it's there, easy to see, easy to process, so I guess what I'm saying all they need is some kind of simple tethering and let Adobe do the heavy lifting.
You can even tone and color the video in cs4 extended.
Actually the only downer I see to this Pentax camera is the 500 a month mark and that it's not offered world wide, because if they only get 1/1000th's of the medium format film photographers in Japan they'd probably sell 500 a month easy.
BC
-
Yeah, in fact, I think this puts both the 1Dsiii (and its successor) and D3x in a bad position, as well as a lot of MFD, because there has been a one-two punch from both Sony and Pentax against these lines. We've now got the Sony A850 for under $2k and this new MFD Pentax for under $10K. We are finally starting to see a bit of a shift towards the film days, where the buy-in for high end imaging, while still not cheap, isn't prohibitively expensive.
This is good news for us: better cameras at lower prices
Actually the only downer I see to this Pentax camera is the 500 a month mark and that it's not offered world wide, because if they only get 1/1000th's of the medium format film photographers in Japan they'd probably sell 500 a month easy.
The price gap between an MFDB and MF film is still significant, especially for those with investments in incompatible MF lenses.
Also, Michael's assessment of the entire global MFDB market is well below 10,000 units. If Pentax sells 500 a month they'd be a market share winner in less than a year.
But who knows, maybe this is such a game changer it will convert a whole new market segment to MFDB. The pricing alone puts it in the reach of many enthusiasts, and I'm sure the camera will compete against top-end dSLR investments.
-
(http://photorumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/pentax-645d-not-in-the-us.jpg)
http://photorumors.com/2010/03/10/penatx-6...sold-in-the-us/ (http://photorumors.com/2010/03/10/penatx-645d-will-not-be-sold-in-the-us/)
-
(http://photorumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/pentax-645d-not-in-the-us.jpg)
http://photorumors.com/2010/03/10/penatx-6...sold-in-the-us/ (http://photorumors.com/2010/03/10/penatx-645d-will-not-be-sold-in-the-us/)
I bet they change their minds once the US reps start asking for it.
-
(http://photorumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/pentax-645d-not-in-the-us.jpg)
http://photorumors.com/2010/03/10/penatx-6...sold-in-the-us/ (http://photorumors.com/2010/03/10/penatx-645d-will-not-be-sold-in-the-us/)
Not sure why Pentax would do this. But hey,,, what do I know about big business. Used MFD or new Nikon for me... Bummer..
-
in the specs for the new announced 55 lens it says that the lens does not work on film pentax bodies as it won't cover the area....so i guess the answer is there....
You might want to re-check your sources. Official statement from Pentax is that it covers the full 645 frame. But all you really need to tell is to look at the lens name: the D FA 645 55mm f2.8. That FA specifies full coverage for film, while the D specifies coatings optimized for use with digital sensors. If it only covers a digital-sensor crop, the designation is DA. I wouldn't be surprised to see some DA 645 lenses appear, perhaps something like a 24mm that would be impressive on the 645D but hard to design for the full 645 frame, alongside D FA 645 lenses like the 55mm that will continue to be compatible with the film 645 system as well as possible larger sensors in the future.
-
(http://photorumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/pentax-645d-not-in-the-us.jpg)
http://photorumors.com/2010/03/10/penatx-6...sold-in-the-us/ (http://photorumors.com/2010/03/10/penatx-645d-will-not-be-sold-in-the-us/)
That loud noise you just heard was dancing in the streets in Denmark and Sweden.
BC
-
Okay, I've sent off an email to http://www.sofortbildapp.com/ (http://www.sofortbildapp.com/) asking for Pentax 645D support.
Great. Let us know their response. AFAIK the tethering application has to have the SDK for the camera it tethers to. For instance Capture One Pro has the SDK for Leaf, Phase One, Canon, and Nikon built in.
The SDK is the communication language of the camera and must be provided by the manufacturer. Strange to hear about the abandonment of their previous tethering application. Will be interesting to see what they do. Anyone have more information about the speed, stability, feature set of the deprecated tethering application?
It will also be interesting to see what sort of performance it would have tethered (if it can tether) pushing 40 megapixel raw files down a USB pipeline without years and years of experience tweaking all parts of the process for high-resolution tethering (as is the case with Phase/Leaf/Hassy). Or how fast a generic program would render the 100% view - the difference in shot-to-render time varies a lot based on the program used to tether such that the same Phase One back renders an initial full-frame preview and a 100% view (to check focus) much faster now than in the days of version 3 for instance, largely because of optimization on the camera firmware and c1 software to get it up on the screen as fast as possible and because of the advantage Firewire has over USB for transmission of large continuous streams of data (as opposed to lots of little files).
DNG or PEF - choice is yours.
Thanks for the info!
I would be surprised if there is not some kind of tethered support for this camera, but the Japanese can stubbornly surprise you.
All they really need is something simple like eos utility and adobe support.
We routinely tether to eos and run bridge in the background, for sorting, checking focus, renaming and rating and do it all on a previous generation macbookpro hooked to a 23" monitor. EOS utility gives you a full screen preview and with bridge, we reads raws, jpegs and video. So far it's been stable and the learning curve is easy.
Working in bridge keeps it simple and if you really want to show an AD a closer to the final look, just double click to camera raw with a preset and it's there, easy to see, easy to process, so I guess what I'm saying all they need is some kind of simple tethering and let Adobe do the heavy lifting.
Of course everyone's needs/preferences are different and there is also significant regional variation, but the vast majority of tethered shooting in the Miami fashion and rental market is to Capture One. From my experience the tethering market share that a EOS/Bridge has is very, very low. So if they have no native software for tethering it will be interesting to see what photographers will be happy with the setup that you outline above that works for you.
Also: I don't know the Japanese tethering market at all. It would actually be very interesting for me to hear from someone (digital tech, sales rep?) with experience with the Japanese tethered market.
Doug Peterson ()
__________________
Head of Technical Services, Capture Integration
Phase One, Leaf, Cambo, Canon, Apple, Profoto, Eizo & More
National: 877.217.9870 | Cell: 740.707.2183
Newsletter: Read Latest or Sign Up (http://www.captureintegration.com/our-company/newsletters/)
RSS Feed: Subscribe (http://www.captureintegration.com/2008/08/11/rss-feeds/)
Buy Capture One at 10% off (http://www.captureintegration.com/phase-one/buy-capture-one/)
Personal Work (http://www.doug-peterson.com/)
-
(http://photorumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/pentax-645d-not-in-the-us.jpg)
http://photorumors.com/2010/03/10/penatx-6...sold-in-the-us/ (http://photorumors.com/2010/03/10/penatx-645d-will-not-be-sold-in-the-us/)
there has to be some kind of agreement with kodak....the same chip....so much cheaper....along with features everybody has been asking for.....you can have the chip, but japan only...
if you see this along a hassH4 40 and the 40 mpix phase/leaf offerings on one counter....20000$, 20000$...6500$...it does not look good...
-
Also: I don't know the Japanese tethering market at all. It would actually be very interesting for me to hear from someone (digital tech, sales rep?) with experience with the Japanese tethered market.
I think you could make a case for not even offering a tethering option. If this is a wedding camera, who needs to tether? I'd bet, if you looked at the entire scope of MF cameras, how many users would really NEED to tether, in real life? Yes, they might ask for it, thinking that they might do it someday, but how many would really NEED it, day in and day out? I'd say a very very small percentage.
Maybe Pentax's theory is: "Go Make Photographs. And have fun." The more I tether, the more I desire a camera that wouldn't tether.
They've also provided a nice, tight 3" LCD as well. This goes a long way toward not needing to rely on a laptop, if you're shooting fast and mobile. How did they do this with CCD, when Phase apparently can't?
By the way, what is the carry-on weight limit for flights out of Japan?
-
I think you could make a case for not even offering a tethering option. If this is a wedding camera, who needs to tether? I'd bet, if you looked at the entire scope of MF cameras, how many users would really NEED to tether, in real life? Yes, they might ask for it, thinking that they might do it someday, but how many would really NEED it, day in and day out? I'd say a very very small percentage.
Maybe Pentax's theory is: "Go Make Photographs. And have fun." The more I tether, the more I desire a camera that wouldn't tether.
I'd be fine with it tethering jpegs only, with a look already selected, for a client to see on a 23" and for a designer to use FPO. Download the sd cards later.
I predict we will see this camera in the states. Its a matter of time.
-
...snip...
Of course everyone's needs/preferences are different and there is also significant regional variation, but the vast majority of tethered shooting in the Miami fashion and rental market is to Capture One.
...snip...
I work in a lot of places and don't see the 'regional" variations you mention, but I guess that depends on what you shoot and who shoots it.
I'm also not saying I won't change, because I've changed workflow a few times, depending on camera but as of today . . .
I'm just explaining an option that works well for us. Especially since we have to review video next to stills.
Regardless . . .
What I've found in the last two years is this.
First, I don't want or need a dedicated only digital tech. Everybody's on a tighter budget, everybody has multiple tasks. At least that's what I see in every market I work in, including Miami. I expect everyone on the camera crew to know how to lift a sandbag and move a light, including myself.
The second thing is every assistant I know understands photoshop and bridge. No we don't hot folder to bridge waiting for images to come up, we use eos utility for that but if a client wants a quick review of stills and motion clips bridge handles it along with ratings, naming, drag and drop sorting.
The third thing is any assistant that owns an I phone can work EOS utility in about 20 minutes of learn time and I find the program stable, obviously has excellent previews and it previews fast.
I'm not saying I would never hire another digital tech that is only dedicated to the computer, but . . .
Gone are the days of the I'm a C-1 guy or a Leaf guy or a Hasselblad Tech, any crew member has to bring a lot more than that to the production. Some have stepped up, some haven't.
Today everyone multitasks and let's be realistic every assistant photographer understands photoshop and since bridge and camera raw come free with the program, eos utility is free with the camera, for me this becomes a very easy decision.
This doesn't mean I don't use C-1 version 4 something. We just processed out a few thousand canon files for jpegs in it, because I like the look and I have two licenses, though we haven't upgraded to v 5 and probably won't for the time being.
As far as final processing, that depends on the project and who does the retouching. If I send it to our retouchers, even if I process out a tiff, they want and need the raw and 90% of every digital image that goes through any retoucher I know is processed in camera raw. A sidecar helps because it gives them the direction we're going.
BC
-
.............. How did they do this with CCD, when Phase apparently can't?
....................
That my friend is called "secret sauce"....
-
Some sense in pricing for the MF market at last. I doubt I'd buy the Pentax but its a compelling option compared to the remortage-the-house or sell a kidney alternatives.
Quentin
-
That my friend is called "secret sauce"....
Pentax make compacts and dSLRs so they can easily reuse the same LCDs. And the guys who make the SLRs can just donate the circuit design and drivers, including ready to run menu/window systems, file displaying code etc.
Edmubd
-
feature set of the deprecated tethering application?
manual is available = http://www.pentax.jp/english/support/man-pdf/k20d_ra.pdf (http://www.pentax.jp/english/support/man-pdf/k20d_ra.pdf)
-
It will also be interesting to see what sort of performance it would have tethered (if it can tether) pushing 40 megapixel raw files down a USB pipeline without years and years of experience tweaking all parts of the process for high-resolution tethering (as is the case with Phase/Leaf/Hassy). Or how fast a generic program would render the 100% view - the difference in shot-to-render time varies a lot based on the program used to tether such that the same Phase One back renders an initial full-frame preview and a 100% view (to check focus) much faster now than in the days of version 3 for instance, largely because of optimization on the camera firmware and c1 software to get it up on the screen as fast as possible and because of the advantage Firewire has over USB for transmission of large continuous streams of data (as opposed to lots of little files).
HDMI Type C mini
-
GREAT it's CCD quality without AA-filter
except CCD doesn't have Live View
-
That loud noise you just heard was dancing in the streets in Denmark and Sweden.
BC
They may well dance in the streets but i think its will be short lived, thats one big can of worms Pentax have opened.
I think it would be better for Hassy & Phase if this Pentax was available worldwide, It would bring a lot more preple into the MFD world.
Also the fact thats its available in Japan only 'initially', is going to have potential Phase & Hassy buyers holding off buying anything or upgrading in the short term.
I also seriously doubt that Kodak have any hold over where Pentax sell it, that would imply that they gave pentax a better price than Hassy & Phase, who would surely not be happy with that possibility either. I expect they simply want to satisfy demand in their home market first.
-
http://www.dpreview.com/news/1003/10031002pentax645d.asp (http://www.dpreview.com/news/1003/10031002pentax645d.asp)
-
http://www.dpreview.com/news/1003/10031002pentax645d.asp (http://www.dpreview.com/news/1003/10031002pentax645d.asp)
Still only 14 bit though.
rob
-
Good thing the Pentax can process JPEGs, so this won't be a worry.
Next FUD point?
JPG transfer to the computer for fast preview is a great tool for some workflows. I wish a Phase back could do so because more options are almost always better. However:
1) Not every camera that can process JPGs can be set to send the JPG to the computer and the RAW to the internal card (CF / SD) - see for instance the Leica S2 so until/unless the system ships and can do so the ability to process a JPG won't do much for tethered shooting (but would of course still be a useful feature in and of itself for some workflows)
2) not every workflow (e.g. high volume catalog shooting) will find that option appealing as it is one more step.
I don't like having my questions called FUD. It's very expected that there will be details not included in an initial press release. The camera has some great features listed so it's very possible that the answer to everyone of my questions will be a resounding "awesome".
I think you misunderstand my intention/motivations. We are a dealer and at various times have sold various camera brands (e.g. we used to sell Hasselblad and we recently picked up Leica). We don't fear a Pentax entry into MF (or any other brand) - we want the market to provide good options so we can sell them! I do fear that despite the myriad lessons of the past (including vapor/crapware from many manufacturers) that photographers will place too strong an emphasis on paper announcements. See the Mamiya/Phase 45-90 lens, Phase One wireless tethering, Hy6 lenses, H3D-60 available April 2009, or for that matter the multiple Pentax 645D rumors/announcements/prototypes since 2006. The ZD Camera in that category since it was announced and met with huge anticipation ("X megapixels for only $X) but took several years to be available in the US, and was fraught with difficulties to say the least.
The point is like any camera announcement - including from Phase or Leaf. I'll believe it and recommend it to clients when you show me a complete/shipping/working/proven/reliable system.
I hope it's awesome.
Doug Peterson ()
__________________
Head of Technical Services, Capture Integration
Phase One, Leaf, Cambo, Canon, Apple, Profoto, Eizo & More
National: 877.217.9870 | Cell: 740.707.2183
Newsletter: Read Latest or Sign Up (http://www.captureintegration.com/our-company/newsletters/)
RSS Feed: Subscribe (http://www.captureintegration.com/2008/08/11/rss-feeds/)
Buy Capture One at 10% off (http://www.captureintegration.com/phase-one/buy-capture-one/)
Personal Work (http://www.doug-peterson.com/)
-
Still only 14 bit though.
rob
That may or may not matter. link (http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/847088/2?keyword=x#7908771)
-
Still only 14 bit though.
rob
They are all 14 bit, the last two bits are empty. Do a search here for Thierry Hagenauer, the fantastic and much missed Sinar rep. He said on numerous occasions that the extra two bits are empty and therefore meaningless.
-
I expect they simply want to satisfy demand in their home market first.
I suspect that they want to sort out the teething problems with the camera in the Japanese home market where the cultural stereotype is that consumers bow and smile no matter how much they get screwed. It's a very respectful culture. If you want to see the alternative reality, look at Sinar's and Leica's experiences with bringing the Hy6 and S2 to market. It's a tough audience out here in internet land where initial missteps can be the death knell for a new product. It is also possible that Pentax could not offer the camera at the indicated price point if it had to offer the level of after-market support and warranty service that would be expected of a professional level MFD camera in the US.
-
I suspect that they want to sort out the teething problems with the camera in the Japanese home market where the cultural stereotype is that consumers bow and smile no matter how much they get screwed. It's a very respectful culture. If you want to see the alternative reality, look at Sinar's and Leica's experiences with bringing the Hy6 and S2 to market. It's a tough audience out here in internet land where initial missteps can be the death knell for a new product. It is also possible that Pentax could not offer the camera at the indicated price point if it had to offer the level of after-market support and warranty service that would be expected of a professional level MFD camera in the US.
Did the HY6 get slammed when it was introduced? I remember wanting to buy one but couldn't find one to test that had batteries in it, and they never really had accessories for it. The S2 got slammed because it can't tether well and is absurdly overpriced for what it is.
In any case, the Japanese wedding market is big enough to support the 645D. I don't think their plans rely on the US and European markets, although, I don't remember any big interweb flare ups over the launch of Pentax dslrs.
-
The fact that it is (initially) Japan only will only whet the appetite for it more. I'm sure some LL member will stop by the local store in Akihabara to take photos with it to his own SD card and posts them on the internets to show the capabilities (no pressure, Bernard ). And when the first westerner takes the plunge and buys a gray market 645D and (if) it delivers half what it promises it's going to be bedlam here.
Pentax might have licensing restrictions, but if the demand is big enough they will pay to get to the market. It might translate to higher prices outside Japan, but compared to the competition they could jack up the prices 50% or more and still stay ludicrously competitive - that's a technical term.
-
I suspect that they want to sort out the teething problems with the camera in the Japanese home market where the cultural stereotype is that consumers bow and smile no matter how much they get screwed. It's a very respectful culture. If you want to see the alternative reality, look at Sinar's and Leica's experiences with bringing the Hy6 and S2 to market. It's a tough audience out here in internet land where initial missteps can be the death knell for a new product. It is also possible that Pentax could not offer the camera at the indicated price point if it had to offer the level of after-market support and warranty service that would be expected of a professional level MFD camera in the US.
This makes much more sense than licensing restrictions.
-
They are all 14 bit, the last two bits are empty. Do a search here for Thierry Hagenauer, the fantastic and much missed Sinar rep. He said on numerous occasions that the extra two bits are empty and therefore meaningless.
hey! ... them two bits is certainly not meaningless ...
they mean plenty to all them marketeers ...
and the rest of them two bit chasers.
-
Does someone have a link saying if the legacy leaf shutter lenses will work on the body with the leaf shutter? The press release only mentions the focal plane shutter and a flash sync speed of 125. My Japanese is not very good.
-
Pentax might have licensing restrictions, but if the demand is big enough they will pay to get to the market. It might translate to higher prices outside Japan, but compared to the competition they could jack up the prices 50% or more and still stay ludicrously competitive - that's a technical term.
Assuming it's the same sensor as in the H4D-40: I don't see why kodak would protect other brands like hasselblad by restricting pentax to the japanese market. HB trades in Japan too, or not?
What would have kodak to gain? HB not getting angry at them? But hey, if pentax agreed to source much more units and got a better deal then HB or Leica?
Would Pentax really let restrict themselves by a supplier.....? That would sound like Bosch, Delphi or any other supplier to restrict sales of a GM car in all counties except 1.
And I, as private person, I would almost find this very offending from Kodak to enforce such restriction and not giving me access to this camera....
-
By the way, what is the carry-on weight limit for flights out of Japan?
7kg
-
The point is like any camera announcement - including from Phase or Leaf. I'll believe it and recommend it to clients when you show me a complete/shipping/working/proven/reliable system.
This is true. Of course, Doug is the voice of reason. While it's interesting and exciting to see a nice usable LCD on a CCD MF camera for once, still, the ship date says May, which means July, and only for the first ten cameras, so that really means September for any volume at all, but only if you live in Japan. So that really means Christmas, before anybody finds a way to bring them back to the USA. I can imagine the tall lanky Doug Peterson, walking on the Delta Airlines plane, with ten of those bodies strapped to his body, under his baggy clothing -- four on his torso, and three each on each leg.
So while this announcement is interesting, it's not going to fall into anyone's hands any time soon. So move along folks, there's nothing to see here. Back to work.
The truly sad thing is though -- this one announcement alone has made every other potential customer of L, H, and P sit up in their chair and pause. Just the announcement alone. Would be interesting to see the sales sheets of those three brands, starting today.
So I hereby announce the George Whitfield 645GW, with a four inch LCD, wireless tethering, and built-in retouching. Available (maybe), June 2011, but available only in Atlanta, Georgia. Stay tuned for more details.
-
this one announcement alone has made every other potential customer of L, H, and P sit up in their chair and pause. Just the announcement alone.
Well, it's a small world and I can bet by the time they hit the shelves in Tokyo, somebody in Hong Kong will be selling them, cause I am positive they sell everything in Hong Kong.
Regardless, whether we get to ever buy it or not, you'll never look down at your L, H, P, M, medium format camera again thinking this is the very best possible for 20 to 30 grand, cause it's been proven someone can do a whole lot more for under 10.
BC
-
It seems that Ken Rockwell is not convinced at all: http://kenrockwell.com/pentax/645d/index.htm (http://kenrockwell.com/pentax/645d/index.htm)
-
It seems that Ken Rockwell is not convinced at all: http://kenrockwell.com/pentax/645d/index.htm (http://kenrockwell.com/pentax/645d/index.htm)
Oh dear, you made me click a Ken Rockwell link - now I need a shower to get the icky feeling off.
The competition has some features so poor that they would have been chuckle-worthy on a 1990s film SLR, and Mr Rockwell implies the pre-historic metering and AF of the competition is somehow better than multi-zone.
He mentions Live View on his rant, but I think that's an error on his part. Shocking, I know.
I should add his site to my hosts file. He used to be entertaining but now he's just another troll.
-
Oh dear, you made me click a Ken Rockwell link - now I need a shower to get the icky feeling off.
Sorry Feppe! but I adviced before the link.
-
I believe that the main target for the 645D in Japan is not wedding, but landscape.
I have never seen a Pentax 645 in the hands of a wedding pro around here, but about half of the landacape shooters use a 645AF... the focus of the specs (weather sealing, cold weather,...) is also clearly focused on the great outdoors.
So thethered shooting is probably low on the priority list of Pentax and skin tones might be as well. I know for a fact that the Mamiya ZD was delayed at least several months because they were not happy about the skin tones delivered by their own Mamiya raw conversion software back then. I could be that Pentax wants to avoid such problems too.
As far as customers in Japan saying yes to everything, this simply is not true. The respect is more from the manufacturers to anticipate the potential complains of the buyers which drives the amazing level of service and daily life quality you can experience around here.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
So thethered shooting is probably low on the priority list of Pentax and skin tones might be as well. I know for a fact that the Mamiya ZD was delayed at least several months because they were not happy about the skin tones delivered by their own Mamiya raw conversion software back then. I could be that Pentax wants to avoid such problems too.
SilkyPix from ISL (that is what people in Japan use a lot I guess and its engine is used by Pentax DCU) has a good experience in delivering proper colors for various cameras... http://www.isl.co.jp (http://www.isl.co.jp) + http://www.silkypixuk.com (http://www.silkypixuk.com) + http://www.shortcutinc.com/forums (http://www.shortcutinc.com/forums)
-
Some additional images of camera and it's components
http://www.fareastgizmos.com/digital_camer...slr_cameras.php (http://www.fareastgizmos.com/digital_cameras/pentax_645d_designed_to_be_the_top_of_mediumformat_digital_slr_cameras.php)
-
Some additional images of camera and it's components
http://www.fareastgizmos.com/digital_camer...slr_cameras.php (http://www.fareastgizmos.com/digital_cameras/pentax_645d_designed_to_be_the_top_of_mediumformat_digital_slr_cameras.php)
by the look of those pics, it doesnt look like its going to get a vertical grip (no contacts).
-
by the look of those pics, it doesnt look like its going to get a vertical grip (no contacts).
Not necessarily. Many camera vertical grips have a battery insert instead of exposed contacts:
(http://www.getprice.com.au/images/uploadimg/1395/350_1BGVGC90AMmedium.jpg)
-
Not necessarily. Many camera vertical grips have a battery insert instead of exposed contacts:
(http://www.getprice.com.au/images/uploadimg/1395/350_1BGVGC90AMmedium.jpg)
yeah, maybe like that.
-
I have mixed feelings.
The interface is exactly in line with the Pentaxes dslr, the philosophy seems to be in between FF35mm and the classic MFDs wich is not a bad thing in itself, but then is that gona be enough with the new Nikons, Canons FF and maybe Sony ? The Pentax will really have to deliver better IQ in order to be tempting because what would be the point to carry a more heavy and bigger camera on the field if it just not outperforms the 35mm band?
We'll have to see the specs very closely, and the tethered point worries me a little bit.
In Spain, camera price is given at 7000 euros.
It is not a very good news that this Pentax is not Full Frame MF. Is not going to compeat directly with Phase or Hasselblad, but as Bernard pointed, they target a certain market, first in Japan is for a reason. It does not smell a game changer but a nice alternative.
I have the feeling that Pentax released this model because of the invertion they had already made, but won't be surprised if they are now on a 35mm FF in line with Nikon D3x etc...
I think the price, and lens line will be truly the keys of succes more than the camera specs.
Fred.
-
I am not really familar with mulit-point AF...
So my question is: would you consider this multi-point design helpful in any way?
http://www.fareastgizmos.com/entry_images/..._viewfinder.php (http://www.fareastgizmos.com/entry_images/0310/10/pentax_645D_viewfinder.php)
To me it looks more or less like a differentiated center AF (it's obviously a multi point AF pattern for a 135 camera).
The Hasselblad recompose AF feature seems to be more practical... IMHO.
-
I have mixed feelings.
The interface is exactly in line with the Pentaxes dslr, the philosophy seems to be in between FF35mm and the classic MFDs wich is not a bad thing in itself, but then is that gona be enough with the new Nikons, Canons FF and maybe Sony ? The Pentax will really have to deliver better IQ in order to be tempting because what would be the point to carry a more heavy and bigger camera on the field if it just not outperforms the 35mm band?
We'll have to see the specs very closely, and the tethered point worries me a little bit.
In Spain, camera price is given at 7000 euros.
It is not a very good news that this Pentax is not Full Frame MF. Is not going to compeat directly with Phase or Hasselblad, but as Bernard pointed, they target a certain market, first in Japan is for a reason. It does not smell a game changer but a nice alternative.
I have the feeling that Pentax released this model because of the invertion they had already made, but won't be surprised if they are now on a 35mm FF in line with Nikon D3x etc...
I think the price, and lens line will be truly the keys of succes more than the camera specs.
Fred.
No one has made a full frame MFD and both Phase and Hasselblads recent offerings are both using the same sensor as this Pentax, so what am i missing in your thoughts that its not going to compete with them directly?
Looking at the body design, features and construction quality (and price) i cant see how anyone can think its not a game changer !
-
To me it looks more or less like a differentiated center AF (it's obviously a multi point AF pattern for a 135 camera).
The Hasselblad recompose AF feature seems to be more practical... IMHO.
That is for sure a far cry from DSLR level.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
No one has made a full frame MFD and both Phase and Hasselblads recent offerings are both using the same sensor as this Pentax, so what am i missing in your thoughts that its not going to compete with them directly?
Assuming your goal is photography and not inane scientific numeric precision then Phase One has been shipping a full-frame MFD (the P65+) for 15 months now.
(http://www.captureintegration.com/download/p65size.jpg)
If that difference is not negligible for any photographic purpose I don't know what is. Especially since the viewfinder coverage of the Phase One AF/DF bodies is 100% when shooting with a 65+ (without any masks or etchings).
Since I was at it: here is 645 film vs the sensor size in use in the shipping Phase One P40+, Aptus-II 8, H4D-40, and announced Pentax 645D.
(http://www.captureintegration.com/download/44-33.jpg)
Doug Peterson ()
__________________
Head of Technical Services, Capture Integration
Phase One, Leaf, Cambo, Canon, Apple, Profoto, Eizo & More
National: 877.217.9870 | Cell: 740.707.2183
Newsletter: Read Latest or Sign Up (http://www.captureintegration.com/our-company/newsletters/)
RSS Feed: Subscribe (http://www.captureintegration.com/2008/08/11/rss-feeds/)
Buy Capture One at 10% off (http://www.captureintegration.com/phase-one/buy-capture-one/)
Personal Work (http://www.doug-peterson.com/)
-
Assuming your goal is photography and not inane scientific numeric precision then Phase One has been shipping a full-frame MFD (the P65+) for 15 months now.
(http://www.captureintegration.com/download/p65size.jpg)
If that difference is not negligible for any photographic purpose I don't know what is. Especially since the viewfinder coverage of the Phase One AF/DF bodies is 100% when shooting with a 65+ (without any masks or etchings).
Since I was at it: here is 645 film vs the sensor size in use in the shipping Phase One P40+, Aptus-II 8, H4D-40, and announced Pentax 645D.
(http://www.captureintegration.com/download/44-33.jpg)
Doug Peterson ()
__________________
Head of Technical Services, Capture Integration
Phase One, Leaf, Cambo, Canon, Apple, Profoto, Eizo & More
National: 877.217.9870 | Cell: 740.707.2183
Newsletter: Read Latest or Sign Up (http://www.captureintegration.com/our-company/newsletters/)
RSS Feed: Subscribe (http://www.captureintegration.com/2008/08/11/rss-feeds/)
Buy Capture One at 10% off (http://www.captureintegration.com/phase-one/buy-capture-one/)
Personal Work (http://www.doug-peterson.com/)
...Thank you Doug, you avoided me a writing.
Fred.
-
...Thank you Doug, you avoided me a writing.
Fred.
Oh, really?
what did you just do?
-
Oh, really?
what did you just do?
I was about to send the same pictures sensor size in response to a post, as Doug did it before me, it avoided me to write this post. It is as simple as that.
Fred.
-
I have mixed feelings.
The Pentax will really have to deliver better IQ in order to be tempting because what would be the point to carry a more heavy and bigger camera on the field if it just not outperforms the 35mm band?
It is not a question of IQ.
Larger formats bring images with a different aesthetic...
-
I am a Pentax user, and currently own many A and M primes that I use on dslr. So I really have a special feeling for this brand and hope they will make it.
Just want to ad that I have not said that "it is not a game changer" but "it does not smell a game changer but a nice alternative", so I'm not affirming anything, just a feeling that hope will be wrong.
About built quality, is probably high, like the latest Pentax have demostrated to be so. I have no doubt on that terrain that built quality is great.
The fact that it is a cropped sensor is indeed not a very good news for the 645 lenses owners and it will be very important that Pentax released fast an all range of lenses. But, let's see how the market reacts. It will be very interesting to see the next future Nikon-Canon models, and how the Pentax handle the competition.
Fred.
-
http://www.digitalcamera.jp/ (http://www.digitalcamera.jp/)
-
More pictures of the thing...
http://dc.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/news/20100311_354026.html (http://dc.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/news/20100311_354026.html)
-
More pictures of the thing...
I want THIS version. But I can't imagine that I'd be let on the plane.
http://dc.watch.impress.co.jp/img/dcw/docs...tax_20.jpg.html (http://dc.watch.impress.co.jp/img/dcw/docs/354/026/html/pentax_20.jpg.html)
-
More pictures of the thing...
Nice lineup of legacy? lenses.
http://dc.watch.impress.co.jp/img/dcw/docs...tax_30.jpg.html (http://dc.watch.impress.co.jp/img/dcw/docs/354/026/html/pentax_30.jpg.html)
Hope by Photokina they'll announce more D FA lenses with weather-sealing, supersonic motor and round diaphragm:
http://www.dpreview.com/news/1003/10031001pentax55mm.asp (http://www.dpreview.com/news/1003/10031001pentax55mm.asp)
-
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.
-
The posting of site owner Michael Reichmann about the Leica form-factor comes to mind......why did pentax choose to shape the body to a classic 645 formfactor? I can only see two reasons: 1) use of legacy lenses that need the lens to sensor distance, 2) CCD allows no liveview/evf so an optical viewfinder + mirror is still needed.
It begs the question, agian: when will "we" be able to break away....
-
The posting of site owner Michael Reichmann about the Leica form-factor comes to mind......why did pentax choose to shape the body to a classic 645 formfactor? I can only see two reasons: 1) use of legacy lenses that need the lens to sensor distance, 2) CCD allows no liveview/evf so an optical viewfinder + mirror is still needed.
It begs the question, agian: when will "we" be able to break away....
The "issue" of Live View comes up in discussions related to MFD. Is non-tethered live view possible with CCD sensors or is it an issue of increased costs, etc.?
Steve
-
The "issue" of Live View comes up in discussions related to MFD. Is non-tethered live view possible with CCD sensors or is it an issue of increased costs, etc.?
Steve
Live view directly on the LCD of the camera is not technically possible with CCD's.
-
Live view directly on the LCD of the camera is not technically possible with CCD's.
I saw something, one year at Photo East, with a Leaf back. There was some sort of cryptic b/w grainy image, very slow refresh, that showed up on a CCD Leaf back in LiveView mode. Or did I dream that? I'm not sure how usable it was; it felt like one of those B/W sonograms that you get of your baby, before it's born, at the mall.
If anyone needs LiveView, I just installed this device on my 5d2, and it's built like a tank. Very rugged and precision device. Very soft rubber eyecup if you wear glasses to shoot. Awesome precious diopter adjustment device. Highly recommended:
http://www.zacuto.com/z-finder-dslr-viewfinder (http://www.zacuto.com/z-finder-dslr-viewfinder)
(That's me, in the video).
Next step: how to learn to shoot fast with LiveView. Some of my friends have mastered it. Doubleclick on zoomer to go to 10x, then focus then shoot.
-
The posting of site owner Michael Reichmann about the Leica form-factor comes to mind......why did pentax choose to shape the body to a classic 645 formfactor? I can only see two reasons: 1) use of legacy lenses that need the lens to sensor distance, 2) CCD allows no liveview/evf so an optical viewfinder + mirror is still needed.
It begs the question, agian: when will "we" be able to break away....
the camera is very ergonomic in the hand, more so IMO than the H2 and definitely more than the AFD models from Mamiya/P1.
the only thing IMO that beats the Pentax 645 for ergonomics IMO is the Leaf AFi/Hy6 bodies, that rotating grip is just like butter in the hand, man! but with a pricetag to match.
-Dan
-
the camera is very ergonomic in the hand, more so IMO than the H2 and definitely more than the AFD models from Mamiya/P1.
the only thing IMO that beats the Pentax 645 for ergonomics IMO is the Leaf AFi/Hy6 bodies, that rotating grip is just like butter in the hand, man! but with a pricetag to match.
-Dan
Thats funny, I find the AFd to be much better handling than the H, at least after about five minutes.
The 6008 has the same or similar grip, and can be had for what, $1800 or so?
T
-
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.
Maybe, but I keep thinking . . .
Which is more important, creativity in images or a new camera?
The high end cameras to me seem to be locked in the past, with formats that we call medium (which I think is now something like 6 frame sizes) or ff 35mm and though they can produce a still image of amazing detail, that usually does nothing for creativity.
We are ooohing and ahhing about the new Pentax, I think mostly because of it's 1/2 price cost and near dslr usability, but in reality even if it was sold on your local street corner today what can you shoot with it that you can't shoot with a used Hasselblad, Contax, with almost any digital back?
It might look 25% different to the photographer but to the paying client or the end viewing consumer what is really that different?
Cameras are made to tell a story, whether it' one frame or 500,000 frames, it's all about the creativity not the pixel depth, the smoothness in graduation, the bigger brighter viewfinder.
I think it's interesting that for the Hurt Locker, that swept the Academy Awards, Katheryn Bigelow's crew chose Aaton 16mm cameras to show multiple perspectives and a Phantom HD 1,000 fps camera for drama in the explosions.
http://blog.abelcine.com/2010/03/08/the-hu...nematic-ground/ (http://blog.abelcine.com/2010/03/08/the-hurt-locker-breaks-new-cinematic-ground/)
Her camera package and film costs were probably less than James Cameron's Latte budget and though even with that I'm sure there is some forum post on some forum that says if she'd only shot it with a 70mm it would have won 3 more Awards.
This is a funny business, cause nobody initially hires you for anything but the image, the creativity, maybe your production values/professionalism.
Actually nearly everyone that works in editorial and commerce could (I didn't say should, I just said could) shoot their portfolio and reel on a panasonic 4/3's camera and if the work is compelling enough to get attention, then on the day your commissioned you can go to any equipment the budget can afford whether it be a RED, a 65 million pixel digital back or anything you desire and that your client will accept.
http://tinyurl.com/yj2jb87 (http://tinyurl.com/yj2jb87)
So when I think finally a medium format camera with a decent lcd for 10 grand I start thinking hmm, 10 grand goes a long way to shooting something interesting, maybe something I haven't shot before . . . 20 to 30 grand personal project, now that's an investment that will pay off.
But . . . If you really want to improve the look of your imagery, send a color calibrator to your potential clients, either than or buy an I-Mac and just image everything at that retina burning blue setting they come out of the box with.
IMO
BC
-
Live view directly on the LCD of the camera is not technically possible with CCD's.
Thanks, that is what I thought but after reading "When is MFD back mfg going to have live view" so many times, I though that I would ask.
This may be going out too far out into the weeds but with the high MP backs, critical focusing is very important and live view, with variable magnification, would be helpful. What are the +- for CCD vs CMOS vs benefit of live view for MFD backs? (or is that a wrong assumption and MF AF is superior to manual focus?)
Steve
-
ofcourse it's about creativity, salesmanship and other talents to be successful and not "who owns the most expensive stuff". Nobody will deny that.
The excitement in this thread is similar as the excitement about HD video in DSLR's. It allows people to do stuff or gives them just plain access to gear they could otherwise not budget for.
The excitement for the Pentax is simple: it is the expectation that it gives medium format "bang" for a lot less "bucks".
Wether or not you need medium-format 'bang' is a different discussion.
-
Have you seen this? more photos of 645D from show at yokohama Japan. you can click photos to enlarge it. looks very nice.pentax 645D (http://dc.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/news/20100311_354026.html)
-
This is a funny business, cause nobody initially hires you for anything but the image, the creativity, maybe your production values/professionalism.
Actually nearly everyone that works in editorial and commerce could (I didn't say should, I just said could) shoot their portfolio and reel on a panasonic 4/3's camera and if the work is compelling enough to get attention, then on the day your commissioned you can go to any equipment the budget can afford whether it be a RED, a 65 million pixel digital back or anything you desire and that your client will accept.
BC
Funny you say that.
I've decided to build up a portofolio again, and I'm using a dSLR and a 50mm lens for the sample shots. The work is going into the poses and into the lighting, not in using a big camera, and I'm now looking for a specific type of model. But it took me quite a few years to understand that, and I will always be a better technician than creator.
Edmund
-
the camera is very ergonomic in the hand, more so IMO than the H2 and definitely more than the AFD models from Mamiya/P1.
the only thing IMO that beats the Pentax 645 for ergonomics IMO is the Leaf AFi/Hy6 bodies, that rotating grip is just like butter in the hand, man! but with a pricetag to match.
-Dan
That H series ain't too hard to beat when it comes to ergonomics. maybe the worst camera I've ever held.
-
Actually nearly everyone that works in editorial and commerce could (I didn't say should, I just said could) shoot their portfolio and reel on a panasonic 4/3's camera and if the work is compelling enough to get attention, then on the day your commissioned you can go to any equipment the budget can afford whether it be a RED, a 65 million pixel digital back or anything you desire and that your client will accept.
Here's a guy that had a vision, passion, knowledge of fashion, and a sissy little Canon camera, and he's put himself on the map with just following people down the street:
http://thesartorialist.blogspot.com/ (http://thesartorialist.blogspot.com/)
-
That H series ain't too hard to beat when it comes to ergonomics. maybe the worst camera I've ever held.
I find it amusing to hear photographers talk about ergonomics in such absolute terms.
There is VERY little about ergonomics which is objective.
Even something like a vertical grip is not the universal preference you'd think it is; I've met more than one photographer who preferred to hold the camera up-and-over rather than with a vertical grip even when available. Not my choice by a long shot - but that's the point - ergonomics are almost entirely a subjective preference.
Doug Peterson ()
__________________
Head of Technical Services, Capture Integration
Phase One, Leaf, Cambo, Canon, Apple, Profoto, Eizo & More
National: 877.217.9870 | Cell: 740.707.2183
Newsletter: Read Latest or Sign Up (http://www.captureintegration.com/our-company/newsletters/)
RSS Feed: Subscribe (http://www.captureintegration.com/2008/08/11/rss-feeds/)
Buy Capture One at 10% off (http://www.captureintegration.com/phase-one/buy-capture-one/)
Personal Work (http://www.doug-peterson.com/)
-
Live view directly on the LCD of the camera is not technically possible with CCD's.
To be more precise: Live View at more than about 1fps is not possible with Full Frame type of CCDs uses in all DMF so far, neither on the rear LCD nor on a computer with tethering. Live View at vaguely video-like frame rates and so adequate to follow any significant subject motion requires either active pixel sensors (so-called CMOS; see note) or interline CCD (as in most videocams and digicams). The former is a far better bet for future MF sensors.
Note on jargon. Many if not all CCD's are manufactured using CMOS process, so the naming CCD vs CMOS is strange.
The distinctive feature of so-called CMOS sensors is the active pixel approach, with its on-sensor charge amplification.
-
Which is more important, creativity in images or a new camera?
Absolutely... creativity. Sometimes a new camera can help get it back when you are a bit burned out, but much more often it is just an excuse not to get off your arse and take photos. I really enjoyed the switch from Canon to Hasselblad, mostly because it forced me to slow down and take a bit more care, but also opened up a few new options (flash sync with my big strobes at 1/800th)... and when I get it right, it rewards me with a downright gorgeous silky image.
So now I'm rewarding myself with a few purely personal photo trips to places I've always wanted to go, just for fun (sorry, Mr. Tax Inspector, just as a portfolio development loss-leader project. Ahem. Entirely work-related of course!) Much better than panicking because my H3DII-31 is now outdated and fretting that maybe I should buy a H4D...
And I've taken to carrying a GF1 in my fleece pocket more or less everywhere, because the best camera is the one you have with you.
But . . . If you really want to improve the look of your imagery, send a color calibrator to your potential clients, either than or buy an I-Mac and just image everything at that retina burning blue setting they come out of the box with.
Oh yes. My customers are Joe Public on a web browser, and I shudder to think what my lovely photos look like on some of their screens... I've had people complaining that the pictures are "all dark"... try turning the contrast down a bit and the brightness up a bit, willya? If I was global dictator every monitor would have to come with an automatic calibrator robot arm which wouldn't let you look at any pics until the calibration was done!
Hywel.
-
Absolutely... creativity. Sometimes a new camera can help get it back when you are a bit burned out, but much more often it is just an excuse not to get off your arse and take photos. I really enjoyed the switch from Canon to Hasselblad, mostly because it forced me to slow down and take a bit more care, but also opened up a few new options (flash sync with my big strobes at 1/800th)... and when I get it right, it rewards me with a downright gorgeous silky image.
So now I'm rewarding myself with a few purely personal photo trips to places I've always wanted to go, just for fun (sorry, Mr. Tax Inspector, just as a portfolio development loss-leader project. Ahem. Entirely work-related of course!) Much better than panicking because my H3DII-31 is now outdated and fretting that maybe I should buy a H4D...
And I've taken to carrying a GF1 in my fleece pocket more or less everywhere, because the best camera is the one you have with you.
Oh yes. My customers are Joe Public on a web browser, and I shudder to think what my lovely photos look like on some of their screens... I've had people complaining that the pictures are "all dark"... try turning the contrast down a bit and the brightness up a bit, willya? If I was global dictator every monitor would have to come with an automatic calibrator robot arm which wouldn't let you look at any pics until the calibration was done!
Hywel.
I would not expect a satin lover to work with less than an H
Yes, these browsers...it will be urgent they find a standard. It's a real mess.
Fred.
-
Maybe, but I keep thinking . . .
Which is more important, creativity in images or a new camera?
The high end cameras to me seem to be locked in the past, with formats that we call medium (which I think is now something like 6 frame sizes) or ff 35mm and though they can produce a still image of amazing detail, that usually does nothing for creativity.
We are ooohing and ahhing about the new Pentax, I think mostly because of it's 1/2 price cost and near dslr usability, but in reality even if it was sold on your local street corner today what can you shoot with it that you can't shoot with a used Hasselblad, Contax, with almost any digital back?
It might look 25% different to the photographer but to the paying client or the end viewing consumer what is really that different?
Cameras are made to tell a story, whether it' one frame or 500,000 frames, it's all about the creativity not the pixel depth, the smoothness in graduation, the bigger brighter viewfinder.
I think it's interesting that for the Hurt Locker, that swept the Academy Awards, Katheryn Bigelow's crew chose Aaton 16mm cameras to show multiple perspectives and a Phantom HD 1,000 fps camera for drama in the explosions.
http://blog.abelcine.com/2010/03/08/the-hu...nematic-ground/ (http://blog.abelcine.com/2010/03/08/the-hurt-locker-breaks-new-cinematic-ground/)
Her camera package and film costs were probably less than James Cameron's Latte budget and though even with that I'm sure there is some forum post on some forum that says if she'd only shot it with a 70mm it would have won 3 more Awards.
This is a funny business, cause nobody initially hires you for anything but the image, the creativity, maybe your production values/professionalism.
Actually nearly everyone that works in editorial and commerce could (I didn't say should, I just said could) shoot their portfolio and reel on a panasonic 4/3's camera and if the work is compelling enough to get attention, then on the day your commissioned you can go to any equipment the budget can afford whether it be a RED, a 65 million pixel digital back or anything you desire and that your client will accept.
http://tinyurl.com/yj2jb87 (http://tinyurl.com/yj2jb87)
So when I think finally a medium format camera with a decent lcd for 10 grand I start thinking hmm, 10 grand goes a long way to shooting something interesting, maybe something I haven't shot before . . . 20 to 30 grand personal project, now that's an investment that will pay off.
But . . . If you really want to improve the look of your imagery, send a color calibrator to your potential clients, either than or buy an I-Mac and just image everything at that retina burning blue setting they come out of the box with.
IMO
BC
funny, i was thinking the same thing...if i could walk down to samy's and buy one, would i? probably not....
but that is a sign how times have changed....3 years ago, i would have bought the latest top of the line canon unseen.....today, i would look at that long and hard.....not because of the money....3 years ago, a new camera meant a real step up in getting the image to look like (let's face it) film....now we can get that so cheap that ANY money spent is more related to "must have features" then to image quality....
so a raw HD canon with great iso 2500 and 30 mpix would be interesting...and knowing that these features would trickle down within months into the 3000 range would maybe make me patient there as well....but there is nothing this pentax would do for me i can't do without it....
the exciting news is that it seems that someone finally listened to what people actually want and at a price that people can actually justify....
i would not call it a game changer because the market it goes into is so small that one can hardly talk about there being any game at all....
but it is interesting how much press outside the photo industry this announcement has already gotten....and that is all about the price....so if anything pentax got themselves a LOT of free press...in a good way....and none of these outlets will write about the camera actually failing miserably.....
either way, it would be interesting to see how phase and hass have to adjust if this thing becomes available and people start flying to tokyo to pick one up.....because it is still cheaper...
what is annoying is how many features we have asked for, which "could not be put in DMF" and "just aren't possible" actually made it into the pentax....i would not want to live without a dust removal system anymore....regardless of camera system...this just makes my life easier and my workflow faster....
and there is no way in HELL i would ever get a camera which only shoots raw files that can only be read by one software....just won't happen...for the same reason....workflow....i might change software but i won't be stuck with one propriatory software....
-
To be more precise: Live View at more than about 1fps is not possible with Full Frame type of CCDs uses in all DMF so far, neither on the rear LCD nor on a computer with tethering. Live View at vaguely video-like frame rates and so adequate to follow any significant subject motion requires either active pixel sensors (so-called CMOS; see note) or interline CCD (as in most videocams and digicams). The former is a far better bet for future MF sensors.
Note on jargon. Many if not all CCD's are manufactured using CMOS process, so the naming CCD vs CMOS is strange.
The distinctive feature of so-called CMOS sensors is the active pixel approach, with its on-sensor charge amplification.
Thanks, that was helpful..
"The distinctive feature of so-called CMOS sensors is the active pixel approach, with its on-sensor charge amplification."
Is that the reason for heat dissipation issues with MFDBs?
Steve
-
The most exciting aspect of this offering is that it raises questions for existing MF camera makers as to what to do in order to remain competitive and DSLRs to feel some heat with pricing.
The Pentax sets the bar in (A) pricing and finally ( a respectable LCD making it a really portable camera, something that previous backs just brought excuses not to mention false advertisements. I've owned both Leaf and Phase and could only feel safe proofing images on the computer or with my Canon as a Polaroid (WTF). The biggest advantage for me was using multiple camera platforms like RZ, AFD or Hassy.
After obvious comparisons with current MF backs, as a pro (not rich dentists, Golman Sachs executives or weekend warriors) should we consider comparing this Pentax against upcoing DSLRs?
Eventhought I'm a Medium Format and LF shooter at heart...The question I ask myself is..what can this Pentax offer that the upcoming Canon 1Ds or Nikon Dxx can't?
This is my checklist:
MPx-Many of you here have mentioned that 22mp is almost good enough. New Canon/Nikon models will probably be at the low 30's in MPx
Video- Wanted or not good option to have going forward.
LV- I can't manual focus without it. Using hoodman loope, soon swithching to the zacuto model is just great . Give me a Flip up LCD and thats my WLF.
Aspect Ratio- Still only mini645 better than 3:2, but who knows could have a decent VF .
Proven system and availability:Will see!
Software: both tethering and raw processors.
The biggest advantage of the Pentax is not having an AA filter and the available soft and milky Pentax glass.
Please! This is not meant to be a debate, just some questions I'm asking myself, as I consinder what my next camera purchase will be.
-
I find it amusing to hear photographers talk about ergonomics in such absolute terms.
There is VERY little about ergonomics which is objective.
Even something like a vertical grip is not the universal preference you'd think it is; I've met more than one photographer who preferred to hold the camera up-and-over rather than with a vertical grip even when available. Not my choice by a long shot - but that's the point - ergonomics are almost entirely a subjective preference.
Doug Peterson ()
__________________
Head of Technical Services, Capture Integration
Phase One, Leaf, Cambo, Canon, Apple, Profoto, Eizo & More
National: 877.217.9870 | Cell: 740.707.2183
Newsletter: Read Latest or Sign Up (http://www.captureintegration.com/our-company/newsletters/)
RSS Feed: Subscribe (http://www.captureintegration.com/2008/08/11/rss-feeds/)
Buy Capture One at 10% off (http://www.captureintegration.com/phase-one/buy-capture-one/)
Personal Work (http://www.doug-peterson.com/)
Doug,
note the use of "I" in my post. Nowhere did I say it was a fact. However, I'd still bet money my opinion is in the majority. It's not even about a vertical grip. I just think the camera isn't balanced very well. My rz is big no doubt but I'd rather hold that for 3 hrs over an h for 10 minutes.
Anyways about the pentax, I bet it does everything it says and does it well. It might be a new sensor for them but it's not like they haven't been around the block before when it cones to making cameras. If these features have been implemented successly in their Dslr models I see no reason why they would fail here. That camera sure is ugly though.
-
i used to shoot the fuji 680 handheld....and the RZ...for hours...no problem....the H with the zoom is just not doable, especially vertical....the balance is so bad.....i agree that ergonomics is not an absolute thing but there are certain aspects to it that are.....the H is not an ergonomically well design camera if you have average human hands and even worse if you have bigger then average human hands.....
-
Maybe, but I keep thinking . . .
Which is more important, creativity in images or a new camera?
The high end cameras to me seem to be locked in the past, with formats that we call medium (which I think is now something like 6 frame sizes) or ff 35mm and though they can produce a still image of amazing detail, that usually does nothing for creativity.
We are ooohing and ahhing about the new Pentax, I think mostly because of it's 1/2 price cost and near dslr usability, but in reality even if it was sold on your local street corner today what can you shoot with it that you can't shoot with a used Hasselblad, Contax, with almost any digital back?
It might look 25% different to the photographer but to the paying client or the end viewing consumer what is really that different?
Cameras are made to tell a story, whether it' one frame or 500,000 frames, it's all about the creativity not the pixel depth, the smoothness in graduation, the bigger brighter viewfinder.
I think it's interesting that for the Hurt Locker, that swept the Academy Awards, Katheryn Bigelow's crew chose Aaton 16mm cameras to show multiple perspectives and a Phantom HD 1,000 fps camera for drama in the explosions.
http://blog.abelcine.com/2010/03/08/the-hu...nematic-ground/ (http://blog.abelcine.com/2010/03/08/the-hurt-locker-breaks-new-cinematic-ground/)
Her camera package and film costs were probably less than James Cameron's Latte budget and though even with that I'm sure there is some forum post on some forum that says if she'd only shot it with a 70mm it would have won 3 more Awards.
This is a funny business, cause nobody initially hires you for anything but the image, the creativity, maybe your production values/professionalism.
Actually nearly everyone that works in editorial and commerce could (I didn't say should, I just said could) shoot their portfolio and reel on a panasonic 4/3's camera and if the work is compelling enough to get attention, then on the day your commissioned you can go to any equipment the budget can afford whether it be a RED, a 65 million pixel digital back or anything you desire and that your client will accept.
http://tinyurl.com/yj2jb87 (http://tinyurl.com/yj2jb87)
So when I think finally a medium format camera with a decent lcd for 10 grand I start thinking hmm, 10 grand goes a long way to shooting something interesting, maybe something I haven't shot before . . . 20 to 30 grand personal project, now that's an investment that will pay off.
But . . . If you really want to improve the look of your imagery, send a color calibrator to your potential clients, either than or buy an I-Mac and just image everything at that retina burning blue setting they come out of the box with.
IMO
BC
latest canon rumor: raw, uncompressed HD video is already being tested.....can be activated via firmware! utilizing the HDMI port to shoot to an external device....
considering we are only about to see the 24pfs upgrade in a week or so (finally) i would not hold my breath....but it shows how much potential is still unlocked and wasn't even considered in the first place....but with good hardware in place even a several year old (even digital) camera can be and stay cutting edge.....
-
considering we are only about to see the 24pfs upgrade in a week or so (finally) i would not hold my breath....but it shows how much potential is still unlocked and wasn't even considered in the first place....but with good hardware in place even a several year old (even digital) camera can be and stay cutting edge.....
Agreed. This 5DMarkII is the first camera that I've felt like could stay around here for ten years or so. It might not be the main camera for that long, but would be awesome BTS video camera, or location scouting, or casting, or travel, or whatever. They keep pumping it up bigger and bigger with these regular firmware updates. It just keeps getting better, (but you never have to write another check! What a concept!).
What I'd like to see is Autofocus achieved while using LiveView. I'm not an engineer, I have no idea how hard it would be, but if you wanna talk "gamechanger", then that would do it for me.
And every time that we don't hear about the 1Ds4 getting announced, it almost makes me more excited, because they're adding more and more stuff to it every week, I'm betting.
Still, I'd sell every piece of Canon gear I own, tomorrow, if Hasselblad, (or anyone) came out with a small, lightweight, fast, H revision. Big LCD and fast frame rate. There is something about the rendering capability of MediumFormat, optically, that Canon/Nikon will never achieve. That is my own personal feeling. Call it 3D; call it what you will, but when you see it, you know it. Who knows, maybe this Pentax Sea Mammal will deliver the goods, but I'm not going to move to Tokyo in order to find out. But when you scan the Feature List of the Pentax, it just shows that somebody's been listening to customers.
But when there's money on the table, and pressure to deliver, Usability always trumps Optics. At least for me.
-
I agree 100%. I only find magic, art, and personal satisfaction when using my H2/P30+ combo, but that rarely works in a crazed, high-pressure shoot outside of the studio. I'm looking for something that will give me the magic on location, or at least a usable screen.
-
LV- I can't manual focus without it. Using hoodman loope, soon swithching to the zacuto model is just great . Give me a Flip up LCD and thats my WLF.
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
-
considering we are only about to see the 24pfs upgrade in a week or so (finally)
Picked up 2 5DMkll's today and they're,now, shipping with the new firmware
Mark
-
some YouTube videos:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=llLddJ4_c88 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=llLddJ4_c88)
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_quer..._type=&aq=f (http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=pentax+645d&search_type=&aq=f)
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_quer..._type=&aq=f (http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=pentax645d&search_type=&aq=f)
-
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.
*********
I am just a hobbyist but over the past year or so, critical focus has assumed more importance for me. It's a bit discouraging to travel, take photos, get home and on the 30" monitor to see that the focus/sharpness was slightly off. A problem that is exacerbated by advancing age and aging eyes. Do you use AF for you landscape work or rely on manual focus with live view and zoom + mag? That has become pretty much my routine with Nikon. For my old Hasselblad with a low end digital back, I have given up on the ease of use of a 45 degree prism and gone to 5.5 X mag hood. Even with that, I essentially "micro-focus bracket", ie do three separate focusing from "scratch" for a shot and then select the best after getting home. Much ado about minimal improvements, perhaps.
Steve
-
some YouTube videos:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=llLddJ4_c88 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=llLddJ4_c88)
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_quer..._type=&aq=f (http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=pentax+645d&search_type=&aq=f)
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_quer..._type=&aq=f (http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=pentax645d&search_type=&aq=f)
Thanks for posting. I am impressed, also it seems like it may be lighter than other M.F cameras.
-
For the yes/no images, what is the actual resolution of a slighty off focused 40MP image?
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.
-
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 Marie Claire, 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.
Were you shooting stopped down or wide open? I haven't found that high a success rate with my 5D2 wide and actually I am doing about the same with the rollei using MF as I am with the 5D2 wide. I used to do better with my 1Ds.
-
Were you shooting stopped down or wide open? I haven't found that high a success rate with my 5D2 wide and actually I am doing about the same with the rollei using MF as I am with the 5D2 wide. I used to do better with my 1Ds.
I was in studio on white and shot at f7.1 with an 85mm.
It was not a canon though.
-
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
IMO distances slightly closer than infinity, i.e. almost but not quite infinity, are by far the most challenging distances to focus, especially with wider lenses.
I'd never rely on AF for these distances. I also don't think that a camera LCD will display critical focus at these distances accurate enough.
And it's impossible to judge correct focus at these distances on the screen (as everything appears to be sharp).
Now, a split image screen will help you to achieve perfect focus at these distances all the time. You really see the slightest offset in the split image even with wide angles.
-
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
-
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?
-
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.
-
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 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
-
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
-
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.
-
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!
-
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
-
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.
-
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 (http://stocklandmartelblog.com/) 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...
-
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.
-
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?
-
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
-
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 (http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/DOF-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 (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
-
Watch the news section in the coming days, some more info should show up.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
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
-
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 (http://dc.watch.impress.co.jp/img/dcw/docs/353/742/044_s.jpg) 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
-
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 (http://dc.watch.impress.co.jp/img/dcw/docs/353/742/044_s.jpg) 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
-
.....obviously they are marketing this camera to someone other than me.
BC
Targeted at landscape photogs
(http://www.pentax.jp/japan/imaging/digital/medium/645d/image/main_image.jpg)
so I don't expect tethering.
-
I posted this at the "Official" thread, but this SUPER Thread seems where the action is with 30,000+ visits
LOTS of detailed photos at:
http://translate.google.com/translate?js=y...sl=ja&tl=en (http://translate.google.com/translate?js=y&prev=_t&zn=en&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&layout=1&eotf=1&u=http%3A%2F%2Fdc.watch.impress.co.jp%2Fdocs%2Freview%2Fpview%2F20100315_353742.html&sl=ja&tl=en)
-
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.
Master Cooter,
I agree completely, but I'd project that the number of people that really use tethering hard, on location, under less than ideal conditions are a tiny percentage of less than one percent. My solution with the 5D2 was to buy an L Bracket from RRS and let the cable come out of the body, and then duct tape the cable to the vertical rising L bracket, up the left side. It's not pretty but it's solid. That body is just called The Tether Body.
Yes, the 1ds3 cable solution was elegant, solid, and fullproof. Agreed. (Until you lost the little screw-in pieces).
I'd respectfully suggest a threaded female in the body to receive a threaded screw-in tethering cable. It would look similar to those old timey Nikon sync cords that they used to have, back in pre-PocketWizard days. The sync cord did not simply push in, it threaded in. You could dangle the camera body from it, it was that solid. Do I think Canon will implement this? Not a chance in hell.
-
Master Cooter,
I agree completely, but I'd project that the number of people that really use tethering hard, on location, under less than ideal conditions are a tiny percentage of less than one percent. My solution with the 5D2 was to buy an L Bracket from RRS and let the cable come out of the body, and then duct tape the cable to the vertical rising L bracket, up the left side. It's not pretty but it's solid. That body is just called The Tether Body.
Yes, the 1ds3 cable solution was elegant, solid, and fullproof. Agreed. (Until you lost the little screw-in pieces).
I'd respectfully suggest a threaded female in the body to receive a threaded screw-in tethering cable. It would look similar to those old timey Nikon sync cords that they used to have, back in pre-PocketWizard days. The sync cord did not simply push in, it threaded in. You could dangle the camera body from it, it was that solid. Do I think Canon will implement this? Not a chance in hell.
I agree.
I think the whole problem is we're too damn uptight.
I know, I know, at the current production prices we all do serious biz, but I've come to the conclusion since digital, we're all too damn serious about this stuff.
Jezz, client staring into monitors, 6 pm e-mails requesting 12 files from 3 years ago into final retouching the next day, web galleries that are color managed, contact sheets in sequential order, exact naming of files, 6 ways to process, 20 ways to digital asset management, whew . . . if we don't watch it we're going to become like those guys in the Senate always frowning and always bitching about what's not happening.
This stuff is silly and way, way overburdening.
I've got so many raid drives running in my two offices that I don't ever need to turn the heater on. How f---ed up is that?
I've got three different monitor calibrators and if you can take any of the multiple monitors I own and make them look the same, I'll kiss ya on the mouth and even if you can, it's almost hilarious cause 98% of the people we send stuff too is either looking at it on a glossy imac that puts out more light than a 4k, or they look at it on their old dell laptop that is so dim, they gotta go into the corner to see it.
I have this friend, he shoots digital, damn good pho....tographer, and about every 9 months he buys a film camera. About 6 months later he sells it and goes back to 100% digital. I've seen him do it a few times and at first I thought he was searching for that big viewfinder or that illusive film look, but now I finally get it.
It ain't the cameras, it ain't digital it's the fact that we're quickly taking all the fun out of this business.
I know what he's looking for, and I hate to say it but it ain't the film look . . . he just want's to go back and have some fun.
Man when I started nobody expected you do anything other than shoot good and not get too stoned, or at least not fall down until after the shoot. Nobody gave a rats ass about catering as long as there was some drinks on hand and after every day's shooting we all went out and had a good time. Not a business dinner at Capo, Michael's or Nobu good time, but a get drunk and piss off the roof good time.
Show up the next day, knock down some coffee and an egg sammich and do it again.
It was fun and nobody said turn the music down it's too loud. Obviously nobody said let me see that processed image 23" wide NOW and cameras were as crappy then as they are now.
Ever try to fast load a pentax 6x7? It took about 4 assistants. Ever put a pentax 6x7 against your nose and fired. It would knock the boogers out.
The fabled Fuji GSX whatever with all the movements. Hell after a day with that thing I needed to put Band-Aids on 4 areas of my hands that blistered and a spinal x-ray would be the perfect test case for scoliosis.
Ever try to focus a Hasselblad with a long lens on a moving running subject. If you got 10 frames sharp you were a lucky guy, or the god's loved you that day.
But we didn't care cause that's just the way it was and even if we bitched, we didn't bitch to 2.4 million viewers, we just bitched at the 2nd assistant about how screwed up the cameras were.
So this Pentax thing, yea it's ok, still based in 1998 and other than a good lcd, not much different than all the medium format cameras . . . we'll except it doesn't cost more than a Lexus, but with the world going the way it is you don't need even a 9 grand Lexus you just need one damn fast $3,000 Ford (5d2).
Let Hasselblad, Phase, Pentax, sell all they can, to anyone that will buy them. That's not only good for them, in a strange way it turns out to be very good for me, cause as long as I shoot the chevy then I get to here clients say . . . man that was easy.
That's what I need, easy and more fun.
I gotta go out today and buy a few of them little pink cameras.
BC
-
It ain't the cameras, it ain't digital it's the fact that we're quickly taking all the fun out of this business.
I know what he's looking for, and I hate to say it but it ain't the film look . . . he just want's to go back and have some fun.
I know two or three guys like that, right now. Frustrated with the dog and pony show. One of them, his therapist told him to go buy a Film Camera, and not to do any Personal Work with the 5D2 because it was infected with Art Director and Client Suggestions. The funk that they said to him during shoots was actually showing up in the RAW files, if you zoomed in to 200% and looked hard. The funk was like little clumps of black (coal). Nasty. Couldn't even clone it out; it was just stuck there.
The Film Camera had to stay pure and uninfected. The Film Camera was like 1969, and Volkswagen vans, and CrosbyStills&Nash, and running thru fields. Pure.
I laughed at first, when I heard that, then I realized that he was onto something there. I haven't been the same since.
-
I know two or three guys like that, right now. Frustrated with the dog and pony show. One of them, his therapist told him to go buy a Film Camera,
I gotta cure for that.
It's the the Pink Camera, have a drink shoot.
Here's how it works.
First I'm going to buy two of them pink cameras.
Camera one (the motion camera) we mount of a big ol' fluid head and I'm gonna have a big box (empty) fabricated with a bunch of bnc cables and wires sticking out of it that go nowhere. (I'm gonna paint the box pink and stencil on a logo that says PINK.
I'll put a PL mount on it and a huge zoom angeuix lens. It'll look good.
On the back of the box I'll stick a Marshall LCD so I see what we're shooting.
When people ask me what's in the box, I'm gonna tell them it's the NON 16 bit A to D convertor and also a Non dual track sound mixer, as well as a Non storage device.
(Don't worry they'll be asleep buy the time I get to A to D.
Then I'm gonna take the second Pink and liquid nail on one of those lens shades made for a 400mm Nikon. (also paint it Pink). This is my still camera.
I'll shoot everything to cards and when the clients stand around the computer looking for photos I'm gonna play a DVD of Zoolander. They'll think that's what we're shooting and be pretty happy with that.
If anybody has any questions or requests I'm gonna have an assistant hand them a drink. Probably something spiked with everclear. After a few requests they'll kind of forget what they asked for in the first place.
That'll work.
BC
-
You know what else would knock the boogers out - is if Canon or whom ever would finally get a fast wireless transfer going - no WIRE!
(I know there is a solution out now, but does it still require a phd in computer engineering to get it set up, and is it fast enough to send RAWs over with speed?)
-
You know what else would knock the boogers out - is if Canon or whom ever would finally get a fast wireless transfer going - no WIRE!
(I know there is a solution out now, but does it still require a phd in computer engineering to get it set up, and is it fast enough to send RAWs over with speed?)
Everyone that I know that wrote the thousand dollar check, (including me), threw up their hands in disgust and returned it.
Back to Pentax 645D: All I want to know is how they made a large nice LCD work in a digital back that was CCD. I keep asking, but can't get an answer. How did they do it, and Phase kept saying (for years) that it was impossible, due to heat. Also, the dual card SD thing in Pentax rocks. To be able to shoot JPG and RAW at same time. How are they doing all these things with CCD that everyone said was CMOS/DSLR territory only?
-
You know what else would knock the boogers out - is if Canon or whom ever would finally get a fast wireless transfer going - no WIRE!
(I know there is a solution out now, but does it still require a phd in computer engineering to get it set up, and is it fast enough to send RAWs over with speed?)
i don't get that either....canon announces a new grip for the top of the line models and they add "A" (or one of the other older, slower ones) standard for added stability.....around the same time eye-fi figures out how to fit "N" into a SD card...along with memory and at a much lower price.....
apple has used the N standard for years now (i know it is only an official standard since last year)....no problems at all....just a LOT faster and a much wider range....
i don't see what the problem is....but since we just had new canon wifi grips, we won't see anything for a while...
of course i haven't used the eye-fi cards, so maybe they are no good...the reviews for the older ones were mixed, but again those were slower (b/g)....
the only way to use the existing canon grips is to shoot raw+jpeg, set up a HTML server in the grip and log in with any iphone, computer, ipad(!),...i believe up to 4 devices supported at once....
problem with that set up is that: jpegs only (which can be fine), i have no clue how fast the previews show up, what happens if you change the card? new gallery i suppose.....with the new 64gb cards you might fit the entire shoot on one card and have the entire shoot "online" for everyone to see....
i would be happy to hear experiences, somehow it does not seem worth the hassle to me...although it would be a cool way to use one (or more) ipads.....
toys, toys, toys....
-
toys, toys, toys....
interference, distractions, complications....
-
I have this friend, he shoots digital, damn good pho....tographer, and about every 9 months he buys a film camera. About 6 months later he sells it and goes back to 100% digital. I've seen him do it a few times and at first I thought he was searching for that big viewfinder or that illusive film look, but now I finally get it.
It ain't the cameras, it ain't digital it's the fact that we're quickly taking all the fun out of this business.
I'm in this same boat and I'm an amateur. I was a late mover to digital with 30D, and I still get an urge to buy a 6x9 folder or expand my Mamiya C220 lens collection a few times a year. I'm certainly picking up a Gowlandflex when I can find a good one with the focal length I'm looking for.
The main challenge with film is time and money. It takes a lot of time and/or money to get the chromes on the screen. But I still love how 6x6 Provia shot with a camera from the early 70s surpasses prosumer dSLRs in almost every IQ metric I care about. The main limitation with film (for me) is it's almost impossible to get nighttime cityscapes with film due to lack of on-site histogram, live view focus, reciprocity failure and even more need to do bracketing - and here I go with the technomasturbation you just reeled against
I've been looking forward to a be-all, end-all digital camera (for me), and 645D seems close to it on paper, and with an almost-affordable price tag.
-
It ain't the cameras, it ain't digital it's the fact that we're quickly taking all the fun out of this business.
Now there's the truth of the decade..
-
Now there's the truth of the decade..
Thanky Thanky
I just saw this e-mail that was buried in my three week old e-mails about South by Southwest in Austin.
http://sxsw.com/ (http://sxsw.com/)
Now that looks like fun.
Musicians, photographers, film makers, interactive geeks, all the guys that sell stuff to musicians, photographers, film makers and geeks in one drunken combination of music, fun, food and art.
I personally don't like photo shows or expos cause they're all the same. Some guy in a booth selling something and a few photographer's on stage showing what they just did with the marvelous FujiNikon3.
Naw, that's nothing to talk about, or better put that's not the only thing to talk about.
I don't want to get excited about a lens, an Ipad or an estimate. I want to get excited about what we're asked to shoot and btw: choosing background colors is not a concept.
We need to talk as a communication arts industry and not just about serious stuff. Talk about some fun stuff, how to liven up a shoot, have more freedom, not get bogged down in the money, the costs, the demands, but how to really produce sumpin' that doesn't look just like everything else.
Maybe this SBSW doesn't do that, but damn I'm sorry I missed it, but there should be a rule. When creative folks get together it shouldn't just be one segment, it should be everyone's invited, including Pentax.
BC
-
I agree.
I think the whole problem is we're too damn uptight.
I know, I know, at the current production prices we all do serious biz, but I've come to the conclusion since digital, we're all too damn serious about this stuff.
Jezz, client staring into monitors, 6 pm e-mails requesting 12 files from 3 years ago into final retouching the next day, web galleries that are color managed, contact sheets in sequential order, exact naming of files, 6 ways to process, 20 ways to digital asset management, whew . . . if we don't watch it we're going to become like those guys in the Senate always frowning and always bitching about what's not happening.
This stuff is silly and way, way overburdening.
I've got so many raid drives running in my two offices that I don't ever need to turn the heater on. How f---ed up is that?
I've got three different monitor calibrators and if you can take any of the multiple monitors I own and make them look the same, I'll kiss ya on the mouth and even if you can, it's almost hilarious cause 98% of the people we send stuff too is either looking at it on a glossy imac that puts out more light than a 4k, or they look at it on their old dell laptop that is so dim, they gotta go into the corner to see it.
I have this friend, he shoots digital, damn good pho....tographer, and about every 9 months he buys a film camera. About 6 months later he sells it and goes back to 100% digital. I've seen him do it a few times and at first I thought he was searching for that big viewfinder or that illusive film look, but now I finally get it.
It ain't the cameras, it ain't digital it's the fact that we're quickly taking all the fun out of this business.
I know what he's looking for, and I hate to say it but it ain't the film look . . . he just want's to go back and have some fun.
Man when I started nobody expected you do anything other than shoot good and not get too stoned, or at least not fall down until after the shoot. Nobody gave a rats ass about catering as long as there was some drinks on hand and after every day's shooting we all went out and had a good time. Not a business dinner at Capo, Michael's or Nobu good time, but a get drunk and piss off the roof good time.
Show up the next day, knock down some coffee and an egg sammich and do it again.
It was fun and nobody said turn the music down it's too loud. Obviously nobody said let me see that processed image 23" wide NOW and cameras were as crappy then as they are now.
Ever try to fast load a pentax 6x7? It took about 4 assistants. Ever put a pentax 6x7 against your nose and fired. It would knock the boogers out.
The fabled Fuji GSX whatever with all the movements. Hell after a day with that thing I needed to put Band-Aids on 4 areas of my hands that blistered and a spinal x-ray would be the perfect test case for scoliosis.
Ever try to focus a Hasselblad with a long lens on a moving running subject. If you got 10 frames sharp you were a lucky guy, or the god's loved you that day.
But we didn't care cause that's just the way it was and even if we bitched, we didn't bitch to 2.4 million viewers, we just bitched at the 2nd assistant about how screwed up the cameras were.
So this Pentax thing, yea it's ok, still based in 1998 and other than a good lcd, not much different than all the medium format cameras . . . we'll except it doesn't cost more than a Lexus, but with the world going the way it is you don't need even a 9 grand Lexus you just need one damn fast $3,000 Ford (5d2).
Let Hasselblad, Phase, Pentax, sell all they can, to anyone that will buy them. That's not only good for them, in a strange way it turns out to be very good for me, cause as long as I shoot the chevy then I get to here clients say . . . man that was easy.
That's what I need, easy and more fun.
I gotta go out today and buy a few of them little pink cameras.
BC
I could not agree more than your words. Yes, I could not agree more: easy and more fun.
Fred.
-
Back to Pentax 645D: All I want to know is how they made a large nice LCD work in a digital back that was CCD. I keep asking, but can't get an answer. How did they do it, and Phase kept saying (for years) that it was impossible, due to heat. Also, the dual card SD thing in Pentax rocks. To be able to shoot JPG and RAW at same time. How are they doing all these things with CCD that everyone said was CMOS/DSLR territory only?
Maybe that was the reason it took Pentax multiple years to put this camera on the market: technology wasn't yet here to create the package they wanted: processing speed of the asic for image processing, firmware, advances in sensor design, storage media and a market ready to sell this camera. More or less the same story as told about apple's iPad: the idea/vision was there, the technology to make it real not yet, the market was not yet ready.
-
I disagree - I don't think we are taking the fun out of it because I am not sure it was ever that much fun. (shooting for commerce, that is.) During my brief stint assisting I became convinced that every photographer hated his job. Those guys I worked with were some cranky bastards. Stressed by clients, frustrated with glitchy cameras, bad labs, etc. Cranky fellows all. I think one of the main differences is that now, thanks to the web, we can all hear one another being cranky. ;-) Honestly, I don't think they were having any more fun than we are. Not knowing whether you had The Shot at the end of the day, now that was stressful.
-
I could not agree more than your words. Yes, I could not agree more: easy and more fun.
That's why I'm following this Pentax. It seems to be the best combination of all these cameras:
* No tether option to ruin your spirit.
* Big bright LCD to let you know you got it.
* Ugly enough that nobody would bother stealing it.
* Hassie adapters to put my FE Lenses on it.
* Focal plane shutter.
* Affordable enough to buy two, and commit to ONE system.
-
Dear omgwtf, I was under the impression that hasselmiya weren't doing the nice LCDs because of the low volume of units needed. It's like going to a book publisher and telling them that you only want 3 books, and the clerk tells you the minimum is 10,000. So you go home and resume cranking them out on your Desktop Publisher. Pentax already had volume with their DSLRs and pink cameras and what not. (this is only a theory)
-
I disagree - I don't think we are taking the fun out of it because I am not sure it was ever that much fun. (shooting for commerce, that is.) During my brief stint assisting I became convinced that every photographer hated his job. Those guys I worked with were some cranky bastards. Stressed by clients, frustrated with glitchy cameras, bad labs, etc. Cranky fellows all. I think one of the main differences is that now, thanks to the web, we can all hear one another being cranky. ;-) Honestly, I don't think they were having any more fun than we are. Not knowing whether you had The Shot at the end of the day, now that was stressful.
i agree with that...some people i assisted for....i mean they REALLY hated their job/life...and it seemed like they were the ones with the highest paying jobs....but also with the nicest studio, apartement, the house in the hamptons,....mo money mo problems....they all did one or the other things to get through the day....there were other people as well but dealing with both taught me that if you can't handle pressure, get a different job and in the end: it is not like directing a movie where you have a lot more pressure (but also a lot more excuses i guess, more people to blame if things don't work out...)
the good thing about digital is that we know we have the shot and can move on...the bad: we know we have the shot, let's move on, and on and on.....
i think that one of the biggest responsibilities of being a photographer is making it look like fun...problem solving on the fly with ease...getting the shot...mentally preparing for what might/can happen...previsualization (which is different for everybody, some people draw it out, some don't...) know what you want to do and how to get there....from several different angles...go with the flow of the day....don't hold on to something that does not work.....make the best of what is there....if the talent was booked assuming they can skate but they can't, figure it out....that is the advantage of still shoots....
the photographer is an entertainer and every night the crowd is a little different....you have to be able to read it...and adjust....
it is never fun if: the equipment slows you down and becomes the center of the shoot....if some people have an attitude and don't see the shoot as a team sport....but again: that is mostly up to the photographer to assemble the right team.....
i have never been to sxsw but from what i have heard it used to be like what bcooter is talking about.....but it has already turned into a commercial...thing....although not as bad as sundance...yet....
-
I want to get excited about what we're asked to shoot
and btw: choosing background colors is not a concept.
Very interesting statement.
What if you are not excited about what you are asked to shoot?
In my experience in all creative jobs it's the same: today the task is to deliver the same quality level as in 2005 but for much less money than in 2005 (maybe not for you personally but for the production).
Mostly in a briefing clients first tell you about the new project and want to motivate you. And so they paint the picture of a "big", "unique" production.
But at the end they say: "oh, by the way, we just have XY$ for that". And everyone is looking paralyzed at the table…
More smart clients today start the briefing with the budget: "well, we just have XY$ but we want you to produce XY… is it possible?" That's a bit more fun as somehow you are sitting in the same boat with the client. But this is only fun if there is no sales pitch; it's only fun if you already have the job.
Either way… today every job starts with a very hard weighting of a LOT of factors and most of them are related to the budget.
Where is the fun in that?
I don't want to say that it's per so no fun to work for small budgets, not at all!
The problem is that you love what you do and it somehow hurts that "the client" mediately doesn't want you to give all you could.
I mean, we actually always want to be asked to give all we can! That's what drives us. But if someone asks to give just a half of what you can give… that's not really motivating, it's actually boring.
Of course, nobody is asking us explicitly to give just the half. But from a professional standpoint you yourself know that it's simply impossible to give all. Due to the budgets.
This goes, of course, for the execution, not for the conception.
Just now I realize it's somehow hard to explain what I want to say (due to language barriers)… but I hope you get the general meaning…
Back to the statement being excited about what you are asked to shoot.
I think the best person to ask you about something exceptional to shoot is yourself. Only yourself. Be excited about you personal work. Take your time for personal work. Be hard and demanding towards yourself. Think in concepts and series, not in single shots (and BTW: how true - thinking about the color of a backdrop is not conceptional thinking!).
Don't think about a lighting if you don't know what's actually in the scene. Think content related.
Or at least: "Think while you shoot" (M. Munkàcsi).
I love my job. And I love working. And whenever it's possible I also to love to "give all" I can. 60 hours a week and even more, no problem… it has always been like that.
But I am really lucky that I have another discipline I love even more than my job.
In my case this second discipline is photography. As much as I can I am busy with photography. In a serious way. I even moved in my job to be able to spend more time with photography. Would I love to work as a photographer? Never! I already have a job that almost (but just almost) burned me.
-
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]
Hi Billy,
Sorry, those are not part of the interview, and I only had a short window of time to play with one, but let me try to answer what I can.
- the shutter appeared to be pretty responsive. I didn't notice any significant delay and the AF was fast on the high contrast objects I tried it on,
- there was no memory card in the body I tried, so I am not sure whether the delay I experienced between shutter press and appearance on the screen is representative of what will happen in real world situations, but I believe that there was just a 1 to 2 seconds delay.
- I didn't try 100% zoom in, but I tried zooming in step by step and it was fast enough. Probably not as fast as my D3x, but totally fast enough for real world use I felt,
- didn't ask about Eye- wifi
- don't know about Raw buffer,
- they only mentioned a wider lens of un-confirmed specs.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Bernard! I forgot for a moment that you were in Japan. What good luck! I have a feeling you are going to buy one of these indeed. Surely the Japanese menus won't be a difficulty for you. I could sound out the kana, but it would take me a little practice.
-
some YouTube videos:
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_quer..._type=&aq=f (http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=pentax645d&search_type=&aq=f)
A Japanese photographer friend was nice to translate:
Target is high end landscape amateur
Sturdy camera body (almost no plastic)
Usable with FA645 Lenses (FA645 lenses are already focus/color calibrated to the camera; 6x7 lenses are not yet)
Operational up to -10c
13 continuous frames (Raw +s-jpg)
-
I've worked for both the grumpy and the happy stills shooters. The happy had a realistic view of themselves. They had a name, they worked, they showed the client agood time, and would laugh at their mistakes. The grumpy were so bitter that Terry Richardson was getting play and they weren't, that they seathed anger and venom, even towards clients.
i agree with that...some people i assisted for....i mean they REALLY hated their job/life...and it seemed like they were the ones with the highest paying jobs....but also with the nicest studio, apartement, the house in the hamptons,....mo money mo problems....they all did one or the other things to get through the day....there were other people as well but dealing with both taught me that if you can't handle pressure, get a different job and in the end: it is not like directing a movie where you have a lot more pressure (but also a lot more excuses i guess, more people to blame if things don't work out...)
the good thing about digital is that we know we have the shot and can move on...the bad: we know we have the shot, let's move on, and on and on.....
i think that one of the biggest responsibilities of being a photographer is making it look like fun...problem solving on the fly with ease...getting the shot...mentally preparing for what might/can happen...previsualization (which is different for everybody, some people draw it out, some don't...) know what you want to do and how to get there....from several different angles...go with the flow of the day....don't hold on to something that does not work.....make the best of what is there....if the talent was booked assuming they can skate but they can't, figure it out....that is the advantage of still shoots....
the photographer is an entertainer and every night the crowd is a little different....you have to be able to read it...and adjust....
it is never fun if: the equipment slows you down and becomes the center of the shoot....if some people have an attitude and don't see the shoot as a team sport....but again: that is mostly up to the photographer to assemble the right team.....
i have never been to sxsw but from what i have heard it used to be like what bcooter is talking about.....but it has already turned into a commercial...thing....although not as bad as sundance...yet....
-
I just bought a used Littman. I've been shooting Fuji 4x5 instant film. I've been shooting people on the street, in Brooklyn and in Virginia, and just giving them the print after I look at it. Its a pure experience, its not even for a photo I can keep. I shot a job on Friday and to warm up the crowd shot instant film with the Littman and handed out the prints. Holding a one off artifact in your hands is a pure moment.
I know two or three guys like that, right now. Frustrated with the dog and pony show. One of them, his therapist told him to go buy a Film Camera, and not to do any Personal Work with the 5D2 because it was infected with Art Director and Client Suggestions. The funk that they said to him during shoots was actually showing up in the RAW files, if you zoomed in to 200% and looked hard. The funk was like little clumps of black (coal). Nasty. Couldn't even clone it out; it was just stuck there.
The Film Camera had to stay pure and uninfected. The Film Camera was like 1969, and Volkswagen vans, and CrosbyStills&Nash, and running thru fields. Pure.
I laughed at first, when I heard that, then I realized that he was onto something there. I haven't been the same since.
-
In my experience in all creative jobs it's the same: today the task is to deliver the same quality level as in 2005 but for much less money than in 2005 (maybe not for you personally but for the production).
How photographer's work on set wasn't really my point. It was more about the creativity than the process.
We all know to run an efficient set is a team effort and any good photographer that has success is usually excellent at short term management.
Actually, since I never assisted, or had a single class in photography, I probably know less about how other photographers work than any person in the business, but sometimes I think that's good, maybe not.
What I was referring to was how to get the creative briefs past the safe and careful situation most advertising and editorial seems to be continually mired in.
I think, and once again this is just my opinion, that somehow production skills have replaced creativity. How many times do you hear great shot, great lighting, great background but in reality the concept has been repeated a thousand times before, if there really was a concept in the first place?
I think today, with the schools, the web, assisting and training a lot of photographers know how to take a professional photograph, but I'm not sure if all of them know why to take the photograph.
Not to dwell on the past but do you think Rolling Stone would today run a spread of Roseanne Barr covered in Mud, Whoopie in a bath tub of Milk, or that famous John and Yoko shot in bed? How about Esquire. A cover of Andy Warhol drowning in a Can of soup, or Lt. Calley surrounded by Vietnamese Children?
Look at that famous Apple commercial of the woman throwing the mallet into the screen. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8IAzkTpqcNo (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8IAzkTpqcNo) Now we have Ipad ads that look like soft drink ads, that look like insurance company ads. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qS439jCOoEg...feature=related (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qS439jCOoEg&feature=related)
We just don't see that kind of bravery in main stream editorial and advertising anymore and I don't see it as a failure of the public, publishers, ad agencies or clients, I see it as a failure on our part, (the artists) to pitch these type of projects until someone finally bites and gets it in circulation, (either print or electronic).
I don't believe we're without creativity, but I do believe we've become far too weighted towards the production values and process and as much as we all need a team to produce work, the team mentality has gone to the point that sometimes there are way too many cooks in the kitchen.
As far as Happy, well that's a moving target, but me, I very happy, God have a great life, (other than the hours) but compared to 99.9999% of the world I get a front row seat to the strangest and greatest show on Earth.
Does that mean I don't want more, to go further, stretch it as far as possible?
Of course I do . . . that's the goal.
BC
-
How photographer's work on set wasn't really my point. It was more about the creativity than the process.
We all know to run an efficient set is a team effort and any good photographer that has success is usually excellent at short term management.
Actually, since I never assisted, or had a single class in photography, I probably know less about how other photographers work than any person in the business, but sometimes I think that's good, maybe not.
What I was referring to was how to get the creative briefs past the safe and careful situation most advertising and editorial seems to be continually mired in.
I think, and once again this is just my opinion, that somehow production skills have replaced creativity. How many times do you hear great shot, great lighting, great background but in reality the concept has been repeated a thousand times before, if there really was a concept in the first place?
I think today, with the schools, the web, assisting and training a lot of photographers know how to take a professional photograph, but I'm not sure if all of them know why to take the photograph.
Not to dwell on the past but do you think Rolling Stone would today run a spread of Roseanne Barr covered in Mud, Whoopie in a bath tub of Milk, or that famous John and Yoko shot in bed? How about Esquire. A cover of Andy Warhol drowning in a Can of soup, or Lt. Calley surrounded by Vietnamese Children?
Look at that famous Apple commercial of the woman throwing the mallet into the screen. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8IAzkTpqcNo (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8IAzkTpqcNo) Now we have Ipad ads that look like soft drink ads, that look like insurance company ads. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qS439jCOoEg...feature=related (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qS439jCOoEg&feature=related)
We just don't see that kind of bravery in main stream editorial and advertising anymore and I don't see it as a failure of the public, publishers, ad agencies or clients, I see it as a failure on our part, (the artists) to pitch these type of projects until someone finally bites and gets it in circulation, (either print or electronic).
I don't believe we're without creativity, but I do believe we've become far too weighted towards the production values and process and as much as we all need a team to produce work, the team mentality has gone to the point that sometimes there are way too many cooks in the kitchen.
As far as Happy, well that's a moving target, but me, I very happy, God have a great life, (other than the hours) but compared to 99.9999% of the world I get a front row seat to the strangest and greatest show on Earth.
Does that mean I don't want more, to go further, stretch it as far as possible?
Of course I do . . . that's the goal.
BC
Indeed.
There is a funny paradox. There have never been as many photographers, or people who want to be photographer, as now. Every kid can display his pics to the world for free in a decent website. The access to information is immediate, finding gear has never been as easy and photoshop allows a level of post-production unthinkable some 15 years ago. Do we see more great pistures? More creativity ? Well, if with much more oportunities than ever, we do not see better creativity, is that the creativity in itself is simply lower than ever.
There is less fun, that's the point and that is where I agree most with BC.
I see it in agencies, lot of pressure, prices down for more amount of work and technical specs as the new gurus.
The Pentax 645D? yeah, fine, great news, affordable 40 MP.
When I was student in fine arts and wanted to print big, the only MF I could afford was a 150 euros 6x6 Lubitel. Very bad. But it was fun and I did many huge print with that toy in the school wet darkroom. I remember photographers had fun, art director where fun and marketing department did not have the importance of nowdays.
Now everything happen in cold offices, everything smell this sickening artificial air from these bloody offices full of arrogant executives: I can't stand theses places.
Almost all photographers that I know are poorer than before and do not enjoy their job at all, except when they sometimes come back to the source.
There are so many photographers in buisiness that it has become almost impossible to take risk, and sadly tech as overcome art.
Look at that Pentax, how it amazes: "Whao this spec, whao that one, Bravo Pentax, Fantastic, brillant, wonderfull..."
But this Pentax is as good and as bad as anything else that has been ever produced.
It seems that it is the time to admire gears more than pics, more than creativity.
I don't give a damn about this Pentax or this other gear. They are as bad as my 150 euro lubitel.
Yes, a pink camera...
Fred.
-
Does that mean I don't want more, to go further, stretch it as far as possible?
Of course I do . . . that's the goal.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts on this - much appreciated!
Now the question is in which field can you go further? In commerce? Unlikely... if possible at all (within the foreseeable future).
IMO the only way to really go further (in any aspect "going further" might refer to) is in personal work (either way in photography, music, performance arts, painting...).
It's quite easy to reproduce yourself in a certain way of lighting, point of view, colors, "look" or so as all this is related to your skills.
It's much harder to develop and to refine a personal style.
And it's even harder to develop a signature (so that your work is distuingishable from others). This is, IMO, a long term process that you can only achieve in personal work as nobody tells you how the image(s) should look like. Of course, working as a professional in any kind of creative business won't hinder you to reach that goal. But you won't reach it working on a job, you will reach it only in personal work. In consequence that means you have to have (i.e.: to take) the time for personal work.
... IMO.
-
Actually, since I never assisted, or had a single class in photography ...
May I ask where you transitioned from? Were you an A.D. ?
-
May I ask where you transitioned from? Were you an A.D. ?
Yes I started in print production then made A.D. Worked under a great creative director, in a small but good medium sized agency, that went from very creative and stable then the agency lost it's way when they went for the huge money and huge accounts.
I think I had a strange way of art direction when it came to photography. I always hired people I trusted, but never spent much time on set. I would start the day with the parameters of the shoot and usually leave, or if I just absolutely had to be there, never wanted to be bothered by the photographer handing me a polaroid every time he/she moved a light on changed the position of a fork. My opening statement was to make sure I was covered, don't get me fired, but if you can truly be inspirational I don't mind if I go back and get yelled at. Getting yelled at is not that big a deal if we produced something worthwhile.
I would try to hire for talent not specialty. I never liked "specialists" because I felt they were myopic and since they knew only their genre, it always looked somewhat generic to me. I'd hire a photojournalists to shoot a resort, a fashion guy to shoot product, . . . (not always) but tried to hire the photographer for their personality, their vision or I guess maybe the word is style, Don't know because that covers a lot of territory, but I always tried to stay away from the predicable.
I remember the product gig I hired the fashion guy for. He had never shot food products, wouldn't know how to work a view camera if you sent him to RIT , but he could make the two dimensional look real and three dimensions, so he got the gig.
Got yelled at for that one, until the client saw it and was overwhelmed that their cheese product could actually look that way in use. I'll never forget the client said "this is why we hire an ad agency, to be creative".
How does this relate to this camera. I don't know other than the Pentax to me is just another predicable variation of the theme. Maybe it gives a little bit different look, obviously a better lcd than other mfdb, but basically it's just another small framed digital camera that probably will shoot amazing detail in a world full of small framed digital cameras that all shoot amazing detail.
Actually truth be told I'm more impressed with some of the smaller consumerish cameras out there. They may not allow you to tether, but in ways they are almost ground breaking with some of the things they do.
As I am writing this I just received a large PDF from a client on re-use from a gig we shot in Korea at the end of 2008. On this gig I had phase backs, Nikons, Canons, and for this particular shot I used a Nikon N-90 (or is that D-90) I get them mixed up.
I bought the camera to shoot some video (it was a few months before the 5d2 appeared), but since this session framed out where the subject was running very fast on the far side of the frame, the little Nikon's focus points covered most of the frame, so it tracked every frame in focus.
I didn't think it would work so after we shot the first session, we threw it on the computer and looked at it very large size. Did it have the detail of a P-30 or even a 1ds3 . . . no, but those cameras would never have held focus, so 20 to 30 mpx doesn't mean much if it's soft.
The funny thing was in this setting, the N-90 had to prettiest look out of the camera. I guess that covers a lot of territory, but compared to every other camera the skin tones were beautiful, the focus worked, the shot worked, everybody was happy and I got paid.
But and this is just my opinion (well it's all my opinion cause it's the only opinion I can honestly quote) I think any artist can be more than one dimensional or for that matter multi task. I've heard it before that so and so only shoots lingerie, or beer, or basketball, but I've never really believed that had to be true.
I use to think we are what we shoot, but today, we are what we are paid to shoot . . . but only for the moment.
BC
-
Fun. Yes, that's a rather newish tack for some of you folks to adopt, and on reading this thread in its continuity I realise that it all boils down to change: the change from the photographer being the photographer to the photographer becoming producer too, God help him.
I have mentioned a few times that I believe that had digital been the way of life in 1960, then I wouldn't have been tempted to engage with the life of professional photography. The reason for this is becase of mindset. I have never had much interest in things tecnical, and film certainly didn't stretch the powers of the mind very far: it did what it did, usually very well and reliably, and where some have expressed the current joy of knowing they 'have got the shot' because of digital, I can only say that I knew if I had got the shot at the time of going click! I can't honestly say that I had any real fears about things going amiss between shot and processing - one was used to the process and it held few fears. Of course things could go wrong, just as they still can, regardless of what you might get to see in the back of the camera or on your monitor; Sod always has his Law with which to play.
But getting back to the crux of this: fun. It was the sense of fun that photography offered me that drew me in; the thoughts of travel, lots of pretty girls around the place, what was there not to like, especailly when you could make money from it and somebody else paid for everything! And it was all about creating beauty. There was no problem beyond processing, editing your stuff and handing in your invoice a polite second or two after the work was accepted.
Then I expanded into production (calendars) and the fun started to fade pdq. From shooting and forgetting, I took on responsibility for the work of others: separation houses and printers. You want bile in your throat? Stand in a factory beside a machine when it's turning out stuff that doesn't look like the stuff your client accepted. You want tears in your eyes? Be at the end of a telephone when your client tells you that the calendars that arrived in South Africa don't fit the envelopes that the printer sent with them. Had all of this. And that's where you are all heading in the brave new world of doing more than what you came in for: shooting pictures.
Unles you guys still active find a way back to being photographers, neither more nor less, apart from a tiny minority that loves both parts of the job, you have lost the fun for ever. I really do believe this to be true.
Rob C
-
Unles you guys still active find a way back to being photographers, neither more nor less, apart from a tiny minority that loves both parts of the job, you have lost the fun for ever. I really do believe this to be true.
spot-on ... I believe that is quite right!
-
I think that the biggest problem with digital is that we will soon need an army of specialists and engineers in order to make all the machinery working properly. I've never spend so many time in front of a screen just to repair, recalibrate, reconecting, updating, relearning what was suposed to be learned etc...Digital is fantastic in a way, on the other hand, it just pump your time and energy, at least mine.
And the time to do real photography is less and less. More gears, more power, more specs (that we use 10%), more complexity, more everything and less shooting and time for the fun.
I think this guy who every 9 mouths was buying a film camera for the fun is right.
Fred.
-
........I've never spend so many time in front of a screen just to repair, recalibrate, reconecting, updating, relearning what was suposed to be learned etc...Digital is fantastic in a way, on the other hand, it just pump your time and energy, at least mine.......
Like in the film days: outsource the printmaking to a lab and don't do it yourself.
-
to bring this thread back to the 645
Concerning the article on LuLa about the Pentax: Bernard thanks for the write up and Michael thanks for putting it online.
Bernard you posed the question
You mentioned that the 645D is close to high end backs in terms of image quality. DR is an important and much debated factor these days. How do you feel the 645D fares DR-wise?
Your question implies that the pentax exec said more about IQ then what was published as his answer is about DR only. "Close to"....so in what terms does Pentax think it's close to the competition but not on par?
-
I'd like to see:
• how easy for user to set up connection between computer and camera
• how many seconds later does image appear on computer display
Has anyone tried "N" speed Eye-Fi card in SD slot of Canon 1ds3?
Snip from http://www.tuaw.com/2010/03/23/eye-fi-pro-...bably-want-one/ (http://www.tuaw.com/2010/03/23/eye-fi-pro-x2-cards-have-arrived-and-you-probably-want-one/)
Pro X2 supports "Ad Hoc," meaning that if you are out somewhere without a real Wi-Fi network but only your laptop,
you can create an Ad Hoc Wi-Fi network on your laptop and have the pictures upload to your laptop without a router.
-
Not to flog an old thread to death, but, as photorumors.com has reported, the 645D is available for pre-order by a retailer that exports japanese products to the USA for a cost of $10,348 USD.
http://www.japantrendshop.com/pentax-645d-p-833.html (http://www.japantrendshop.com/pentax-645d-p-833.html)
While you're there, you might also want to pick-up a set of Star Wars Light Saber chopsticks:
http://www.japantrendshop.com/star-wars-li...icks-p-769.html (http://www.japantrendshop.com/star-wars-light-saber-chopsticks-p-769.html)
Talk about one stop shopping! ;-)
-
Trendy! And only a thousand dollars more than amazon.co.jp is asking. I do want the light saber chopsticks though.
-
Does anyone know if the 645D will or will not have some kind of live view and tethered operation? Is the statement that they might change out the CCD for a CMOS sensor just PR. How fast can Pentax produce a zoom that covers everything from 35mm to say 14mm into production and how much will it cost. I talked to Calumet about availability and all they came up with was it will be available in Europe and Japan. Seems to me with all these unanswered question 2011 might be a good time to look at this system.
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xd1V58LsKtc...player_embedded (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xd1V58LsKtc&feature=player_embedded)
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xd1V58LsKtc...player_embedded (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xd1V58LsKtc&feature=player_embedded)
This is being shown at a show in Canada?
Thats an unusual move for a product thats not been sold outside of Japan
If it performs as well as it looks then its going to be something special.
-
This is being shown at a show in Canada?
Thats an unusual move for a product thats not been sold outside of Japan
They will go on sales in Japan on June 11th. Street price at launch is announced at 763.000 Yen (8,200 US$), which is about 15% below list price.
As a comparison a 1dsmkIII now goes for 580,000 Yen and a D3x for 644,000 Yen.
The Pentax is likely to be very difficult to find in the first few months...
Regards,
Bernard
-
I've been wondering if David Lachapelle will pick one up, maybe become the "spokesman" for Pentax, as a pro user. Especially since he was known to be a big user of the Pentax 645's with film. I think he's using a Phase back now, but in the end, who cares ?
-Dan
-
There is a web page from Pentax:
http://www.pentax.jp/japan/imaging/digital...um/645d/ex.html (http://www.pentax.jp/japan/imaging/digital/medium/645d/ex.html)
It has some full-res jpegs.
But the useful results will be some head-to-head tests with competitive systems.
-
There is a web page from Pentax:
http://www.pentax.jp/japan/imaging/digital...um/645d/ex.html (http://www.pentax.jp/japan/imaging/digital/medium/645d/ex.html)
It has some full-res jpegs.
But the useful results will be some head-to-head tests with competitive systems.
Thanks for the link. Pretty good I should say if these files have not been sharpened. Would need to process the raw files through C1 to form a final opinion.
There are remarkably few artifacts which hints at advanced software processing. Files appear to be similar to those of the Leica S2 (at 1/3rd the price). My guess is that it would most probably be very hard to tell apart in print whatever the size.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Thanks for the link. Pretty good I should say if these files have not been sharpened. Would need to process the raw files through C1 to form a final opinion.
Oh, the irony. You work and you work, to make your software great, and then that software is used on another competing camera, to get the best out of the file.
Don't you know that there's just part of PhaseOne that secretly wants to make that Pentax645D ICC profile less than optimum? "Hey Bob, yeah, you've put enough time into that profile -- let's move on to the next one. Just get close enough, and then mark it finished".
-
They will go on sales in Japan on June 11th. Street price at launch is announced at 763.000 Yen (8,200 US$), which is about 15% below list price.
As a comparison a 1dsmkIII now goes for 580,000 Yen and a D3x for 644,000 Yen.
The Pentax is likely to be very difficult to find in the first few months...
Regards,
Bernard
I´ve always wondered about the very nature of the japanese photographer. It is tremendously weird for a camera this expensive to be sold out. And that is something that has me extremely astonished. The hability of a whole market to be so leftfield [along with the SouthKorean market] compared to us westerners, and it does bring a new light to objects and technologies which are essentially european [meaning westerner].
-
I´ve always wondered about the very nature of the japanese photographer. It is tremendously weird for a camera this expensive to be sold out. And that is something that has me extremely astonished. The hability of a whole market to be so leftfield [along with the SouthKorean market] compared to us westerners, and it does bring a new light to objects and technologies which are essentially european [meaning westerner].
Just because it's sold out doesn't mean it sells well, or that they have manufactured an appreciable number of cameras.
-
It is tremendously weird for a camera this expensive to be sold out.
That depends entirely on how many or how few are available; it only indicates that Pentax has probably been conservative with its initial production levels. I have seen a claim that production is at 500/month, starting a couple of months ago, so the sell-out could mean nothing more than about 1,000 pre-orders, filling a backlog of demand from Pentax 645 users who have been waiting on this for several years.
The hability of a whole market to be so leftfield ...
See above: about 1,000 customers is very far from being the whole Japanese market!
For a truly left-field figure, how about reports that m4/3 has 20% of the Japanese market share for interchangeable lens digital cameras, more than I have previously seen in global market share for "all DSLR brands except Canon and Nikon combined".
-
Can't remember where I read it (probably on LL) but there was an estimate that the worldwide new MFDB market ran at around 5000 units annually.
So, if Pentax shift 1000 that'd be 20% market share over night. If they sell 500 a month, well that's a whole new ball game.
I'm still puzzled why Phase/Leaf haven't done anything to compete with this. Maybe they're hoping it will fall flat on its face? Hmmm...never a great business strategy to simply hope your competition will fail of its own accord.
-
I'm still puzzled why Phase/Leaf haven't done anything to compete with this. Maybe they're hoping it will fall flat on its face? Hmmm...never a great business strategy to simply hope your competition will fail of its own accord.
Maybe they are banking on the bias of wealthy amateurs for objects of desire manufactured in a Nord Europa Wagnerian dream of beauty, purity, and cleanliness.
-
... if Pentax shift 1000 that'd be 20% market share over night. If they sell 500 a month, well that's a whole new ball game.
If Pentax keeps shifting 500/mo, that would be a great success. But initial pent-up demand reflected in pre-orders is very different from sustained sales rate: Apple sold about 500,000 iPads in the first week, but the pace has slowed a bit since then!
Do not get me wrong: I am hoping that Pentax can revive its role as the most affordable and best value for money option in MF.
-
Don't you know that there's just part of PhaseOne that secretly wants to make that Pentax645D ICC profile less than optimum? "Hey Bob, yeah, you've put enough time into that profile -- let's move on to the next one. Just get close enough, and then mark it finished".
That would be a bit risky wouldn't it.
I don't know what fraction of Phase revenue is accounted for by C1, but I would guess that it is significant.
The very existence of the Pentax 645D should be plenty proof that the current business model of the back makers might need some re-thinking. In this context C1 appears to be the most valuable product line at Phaseone.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
I'm still puzzled why Phase/Leaf haven't done anything to compete with this. Maybe they're hoping it will fall flat on its face? Hmmm...never a great business strategy to simply hope your competition will fail of its own accord.
They have been pretty clear that they don't care for volume and prefer to focus on the top 5%.
Now the problem is of course that for some important applications like landscape the Pentax appears to be a much better option, would it only be thanks to its much better battery life in cold weather and rugedness. Unless your photography focuses on nice weather by the road shooting.
If I can afford only one camera, then I'd rather have one that is enough of an all rounder. What it means is that when considered globally the "40 megapixel/shoot anywhere/any time" proposal of the 645D is - to me at least - more top 5% than the "60 megapixel/shoot 50 frames per battery at -10C" of the P65+. Yet the Pentax is 5 times cheaper.
The challenge is so huge that I don't see how Phaseone could react productwise.
The equation is of course different if you need thethered shooting or the ability to use your back by itself. I don't know what percentage of Phaseone customer actually do this, but it shouldn't be much above 25%. It is also true that the P65+ has a larger sensor and some more objective differentiators. Now can the difference between really excellent and even better be seen in prints?
But in the end the 645D might enable the market to understand better what Phaseone owners really want from their back. If performance as a photographic tool it is, then Phaseone has tough days ahead. If it is more of a status thing "I own the most expensive camera on earth" then they should fine. I suspect that it is the latter. If it is the latter Phaseone should by any means keep their high prices which they have been doing...
Looking at things the other way around the lack of reaction from Phaseone can perhaps be interpreted as a confirmation that many Phaseone buyers love spending more than other photographers.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Well, Pentax bringing out a camera at less than half the price of the competitive systems might change the market volume.
Those who favor the PhaseOne, Hasselblad, Leaf, and Leica systems may benefit from the price pressure that the Pentax will introduce into the market. Or they may be hurt if Pentax drives them out of the market.
-
Here's what the appeal is to me for that Pentax: I can buy two of them, (one for backup), for the same money that I could buy one Hassie H4d40.
Whatever I buy, I've got to have two of them in the bag. To have a 24 hour loaner is of no use to me -- I've got a client standing there at 930am when that first body goes down, and people on the clock, so i've got to be able to effortlessly reach for a backup body if I have a problem.
The H4 40 or the P40 starts to make sense until you factor in the backup system, then you're getting into Real Money.
-
Note the dates of the quotes below.
According to some apparently reliable sources on Rob Galbraith's forum, some European Calumet outlets are pricing the New Mamiya ZD back at around Euros 7,990 and the Camera around Euros 8,800 before VAT. Pretty agressive pricing, if correct - could radically change the MF digital world.
Hello all: With the announcement of the Mamiya ZD coming to market soon, I was wondering if anyone has thoughts about the estimated price for the Mamiya digital back. A couple of years back I decided to move from 35mm to medium format and picked up a Mamiya 645 AFD. [...] If they did come out with a 22mp back for existing 645 AFD cameras and it is around that $7-8,000 figure....what might that do to Phase One prices etc.? Let me know what you have heard...thanks
Also note that Phase and Leaf already produce several kits with list prices in the range of $10k with street prices a bit lower. They are not 40 megapixel solutions but although resolution is often the most quoted spec for a camera system it is just one of many features and specs.
-
Here's what the appeal is to me for that Pentax: I can buy two of them, (one for backup), for the same money that I could buy one Hassie H4d40.
Whatever I buy, I've got to have two of them in the bag. To have a 24 hour loaner is of no use to me -- I've got a client standing there at 930am when that first body goes down, and people on the clock, so i've got to be able to effortlessly reach for a backup body if I have a problem.
The H4 40 or the P40 starts to make sense until you factor in the backup system, then you're getting into Real Money.
http://www.cheapflights.com/flights-to-japan/nashville-intl/ (http://www.cheapflights.com/flights-to-japan/nashville-intl/)
-
They are not 40 megapixel solutions but although resolution is often the most quoted spec for a camera system it is just one of many features and specs.
Yes Doug.
LCD (readable), in camera jpegs (with noise reduction), color settings in camera beyond white balance and oh yea, price.
Now I'm semi- kidding you, (well ,aybe) but you fellas should thank Allah that the Phase boy's trained, I mean "got photographers accustomed" to tethering.
But I agree. Megapixels aren't everything.
BC
-
Yes Doug.
LCD (readable),
I know this is a dead horse, Doug, but the problem with the lackluster Phase LCD is that it FORCES you to shoot tethered, if the job is important at all. You simply cannot judge any added lighting, fill, HMI, etc, on the LCD.
It simply radically changes the way you work, knowing that every single job you shoot, you've got to drag along a Tech or expensive trained Assistant, in order to run the computer.
I wonder how much Phase One realizes this factor. Over the lifespan of a Phase back, that added cost of Techs or Assistants adds a lot to the net sales price. In this day of increasing demands of Shots Per Day, it makes a Phase One back less and less appealing, absolutely knowing that for every single setup, you've got a Tech in tow, dragging around that Ball and Chain.
Not good. Now with the H4d40 and Pentax have (semi)nice LCDs, I just wonder how much longer Phase can thumb their noses at photographers needing good LCD units. It's not cute any more; it's not funny any more, this LCD issue -- for me, I just begin to consider a Phase back, and then think of the LCD, and think "No way".
How much longer can you stand behind a company like this?
-
Also note that Phase and Leaf already produce several kits with list prices in the range of $10k with street prices a bit lower. They are not 40 megapixel solutions but although resolution is often the most quoted spec for a camera system it is just one of many features and specs.
From what I could see playing with one, the additional resolution of the 645D might be its least important differentiator.
All the interface/physical aspects that are important for some applications like landscape are the real brealthrough for a MF camera. It feels like a high end DSLR.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
I know this is a dead horse, Doug, but the problem with the lackluster Phase LCD is that it FORCES you to shoot tethered, if the job is important at all. You simply cannot judge any added lighting, fill, HMI, etc, on the LCD.
It simply radically changes the way you work, knowing that every single job you shoot, you've got to drag along a Tech or expensive trained Assistant, in order to run the computer.
I wonder how much Phase One realizes this factor. Over the lifespan of a Phase back, that added cost of Techs or Assistants adds a lot to the net sales price. In this day of increasing demands of Shots Per Day, it makes a Phase One back less and less appealing, absolutely knowing that for every single setup, you've got a Tech in tow, dragging around that Ball and Chain.
Not good. Now with the H4d40 and Pentax have (semi)nice LCDs, I just wonder how much longer Phase can thumb their noses at photographers needing good LCD units. It's not cute any more; it's not funny any more, this LCD issue -- for me, I just begin to consider a Phase back, and then think of the LCD, and think "No way".
How much longer can you stand behind a company like this?
Ditto
I know this is totally beating a dead horse yet again, but I have to totally agree
What's up with Phase and the absolutely horrid LCD, I can actually see what I'm doing on the 5D2 and feel comfortable enough to show it to AD's and CD's on location.
Even my little GF-1 has a pretty killer LCD.
I just don't get why this company doesn't get it!!!
and for the record I use C-1 and like phase, but this is just the one thing that I just can't understand...
anyways
am
-
Note the dates of the quotes below.
Also note that Phase and Leaf already produce several kits with list prices in the range of $10k with street prices a bit lower. They are not 40 megapixel solutions but although resolution is often the most quoted spec for a camera system it is just one of many features and specs.
the 40 mpix is the last thing why everybody is talking about this camera.....its a combination of everything everybody has asked for at a decend price.....no more and no less.....i dont see this being another mamiya back/body fiasko.....those samples at 800 were as good as anything i have seen.....yes jpeg....but nevertheless....this seems to be the whole package....
i agree about what was said here before.....the mf backs MADE thethered the standart because we had to....i like shooting tethered under certain conditions but on location it is always a pain....but with the mf backs there really was never any choice.....
still trying to figure out how to include the ipad in the whole shooting workflow.....but my latest gizmo bought for video shooting comes in really handy...a magnetic loupe on the screen....people love it....makes the screen look nice and big....works unless you HAVE to see the shot or are in studio...
anyway...as much as this camera is doing things right, i doubt i would even spend that maney on dmf anymore....the next canons are around the corner and there is nothing this camera does that i really miss.....in the end this seems to be a really big/heavy/somewhat slow dslr not a MF camera i used to use kand love....and since it will open the market from the bottom, we will probably never see a real DMF camera anymore.....
i am amazed how phase/leaf/hasselblad are totally not reacting to this.....other then saying: we have deals under 10000.....none of which have the features or the pixelcount.....
-
Pentax have probably realised now that they should have got the 645d on the market 3 years ago,
but it sells as well as expected its going to give them the courage to develop the system further.
Yes the 645 is real late to the game, but i bet Pentax are drawing the 645D MArkII on the board already, and it may well have a big fat firewire socket on the side. (and maybe one on the bottom too...-to match the two tripod sockets.. )
If I was sitting at the table at phase/hassy HQ i would be buying nappies (diapers) for the execs.
-
That depends entirely on how many or how few are available; it only indicates that Pentax has probably been conservative with its initial production levels. I have seen a claim that production is at 500/month, starting a couple of months ago, so the sell-out could mean nothing more than about 1,000 pre-orders, filling a backlog of demand from Pentax 645 users who have been waiting on this for several years.
See above: about 1,000 customers is very far from being the whole Japanese market!
For a truly left-field figure, how about reports that m4/3 has 20% of the Japanese market share for interchangeable lens digital cameras, more than I have previously seen in global market share for "all DSLR brands except Canon and Nikon combined".
Dear Feppe and BJL.
Perhaps I didn´t make meself clear enough.
I know that the fact of being sold out has to do, mainly, with how many units there are [which is something obvious]. However, usually, companies do design the production cycle in order to achieve profits from the least amount of units sold they can, meaning that if demand has peaked so early, they can make the system very much profitable from the very begining. Which, I have to say, it is quite a big plus.
I know that 1000 customers are very far from being the whole japanese market. But you [and I] should know to better read the quote I made: the whole overall market of "rara avis" in japan is much bigger than that in Europe, most probably for the fetichist nature of those products. Else I can really not understand the limited runs Pentax and Nikon had made for several of their cameras, even the famous 43 ltd was released, in a limited fashion, with the L39 mount only in Japan.
When I meant how leftfield that market is was more taking into account not only this 645d, but also the Fuji Xpan [the one Hassy is licensing from Fujifilm], the Cosina Zeiss and Cosina Voightlander lenses, twin reflex cameras, limited run models and editions, and remember that the KX was there with more than 110 colour combinations avaliable on demand.
Cheers!
-
Pentax have probably realised now that they should have got the 645d on the market 3 years ago,
but it sells as well as expected its going to give them the courage to develop the system further.
Yes the 645 is real late to the game, but i bet Pentax are drawing the 645D MArkII on the board already, and it may well have a big fat firewire socket on the side. (and maybe one on the bottom too...-to match the two tripod sockets.. )
If I was sitting at the table at phase/hassy HQ i would be buying nappies (diapers) for the execs.
Some seem to consider the Pentax a competitor for Phase and Hassy, but IMO it is more serious option for the next generation of CaNiKons DSLRs.
Strictly talking, if you just want 40MP and a decent live-view screen, this hugly fat and slow machine (and probably competent ) is indeed the best offer. Price is right.
But then,
- what about customer service? Will it be the story we heard here from Sinar for example? I doubt there will be a Pentax guy to solve your problems.
- Phase, Hassy and Co are backs (flexibility), so I guess the target is slightly different.
- What about the lenses? Is it going to be like Leica S2, 3 lenses?
Quite frankly, I'm not sure will see a lot this WWII machine (it looks like a german U-boot IMO) in the hallways of advertising studios etc...
Rather it will shine in landscape kind of stuff.
If that Pentax encourage the MF brands to do better screens, better conections and lower prices, it could really be decorated just for that.
But the target IMO is different. When Canon will release a 30MP MK whatever number, and they will, this Pentax may not be seen any more as the Holly grail.
-
Some seem to consider the Pentax a competitor for Phase and Hassy, but IMO it is more serious option for the next generation of CaNiKons DSLRs.
Strictly talking, if you just want 40MP and a decent live-view screen, this hugly fat and slow machine (and probably competent ) is indeed the best offer. Price is right.
But then,
- what about customer service? Will it be the story we heard here from Sinar for example? I doubt there will be a Pentax guy to solve your problems.
- Phase, Hassy and Co are backs (flexibility), so I guess the target is slightly different.
- What about the lenses? Is it going to be like Leica S2, 3 lenses?
Quite frankly, I'm not sure will see a lot this WWII machine (it looks like a german U-boot IMO) in the hallways of advertising studios etc...
Rather it will shine in landscape kind of stuff.
If that Pentax encourage the MF brands to do better screens, better conections and lower prices, it could really be decorated just for that.
But the target IMO is different. When Canon will release a 30MP MK whatever number, and they will, this Pentax may not be seen any more as the Holly grail.
Sorry, but that all sounds like its come out of the mouth of a PhaseOne sales man.
The target audience is anyone who can afford it, and that's still not everyone but its a lot closer than the other options.
And while i love my Nikons, i didnt hear that their next generation was going to have a 44x33mm chip.
-
Sorry, but that all sounds like its come out of the mouth of a PhaseOne sales man.
The target audience is anyone who can afford it, and that's still not everyone but its a lot closer than the other options.
And while i love my Nikons, i didnt hear that their next generation was going to have a 44x33mm chip.
Actually you gave me an idea. I might send my CV to Phase or Hassy, I like the way these guys are traveling all the time and taking pictures from the roof of expensive hotels in Hong Kong sounds like James bond life style.
Well, no Phase, actually I own Pentax and Contax.
I Like this Pentax, but my point is that not everybody wants to get rid of their back flexibility. I won't.
I wish the best to that machinery, now it is available and it's great for everybody.
Now, will it be a replacement of the Canon's and the current MF systems in the studios? I'm not sure at all to be honest.
I think this camera will be extremely usefull for lansdcape and wedding.
Cheers.
-
"but my latest gizmo bought for video shooting comes in really handy...a magnetic loupe on the screen"
Pschefz, off topic but what loupe are you using?
-
i use one of those Zacuto Finders on one of my 5DII bodies, and it's great for video, but no way would I hand that to a client. And I don't want them that close to me. I want them away from me. But the quality of the Zacuto thing is very high.
The tethering thing is just out of control. Everybody in the room with an opinion.
I'd prefer a body with a four inch LCD, shooting to two CF slots, both accepting RAW files, and with some kind of bluetooth sending a small JPG to an iphone. That way, one AD in the room looking at an iphone, and everybody else on the crew looking at the real scene, preventing problems instead of watching their lack of attention show up on the monitor. Sometimes it's infuriating. Gadgets out of control. I miss the old days, when the stylists looked at the hair and dress in real time, over my shoulder, instead of sitting back and watching TV, and saying, "Oh, that's a good one".
-
i use one of those Zacuto Finders on one of my 5DII bodies, and it's great for video, but no way would I hand that to a client. And I don't want them that close to me. I want them away from me. But the quality of the Zacuto thing is very high.
The tethering thing is just out of control. Everybody in the room with an opinion.
I'd prefer a body with a four inch LCD, shooting to two CF slots, both accepting RAW files, and with some kind of bluetooth sending a small JPG to an iphone. That way, one AD in the room looking at an iphone, and everybody else on the crew looking at the real scene, preventing problems instead of watching their lack of attention show up on the monitor. Sometimes it's infuriating. Gadgets out of control. I miss the old days, when the stylists looked at the hair and dress in real time, over my shoulder, instead of sitting back and watching TV, and saying, "Oh, that's a good one".
If I'm right, the Phocus allows you to do the jpeg's previews and send them to the phone.
Somebody from / or Hasselblad user could confirm that. This is indeed a great feature.
I agree 100% with the tethering and isolating or separating all the mess from the photographer and everybody at their tasks. I also agree that a proper LCD with good resolution would be fine...
Don't understand why MF makers are teasing with this.
Maybe this Pentax will force them to react and being more creatives.
But I'd like to introduce a point: yes the MF gear has made the tether a standard, not the photographers. Now, do you think that ADs and all the staff is going to like going backwards? I mean, if you get rid of these gadgets they are use to, no more dispertion on the screen...you know what happens when to take away a toy to a child...
I guess if you take the tether circus out because it is invasive and not practical, I'm not sure the real impact it will have. clients, AD, everybody is used to it.
Would not be better optimizing the tether task instead of get rid of it?
-
However, usually, companies do design the production cycle in order to achieve profits from the least amount of units sold they can, meaning that if demand has peaked so early, they can make the system very much profitable from the very begining. Which, I have to say, it is quite a big plus.
Pentax won't reveal profits from 645D sales, so that is pure conjecture, with no basis even on prevailing business practices. It is quite common for new entrants in high tech to sell products at cost or even at loss to gain market share. The current business jargon for it is disruptive technologies and pricing.
Pentax is entering a new segment with a somewhat disruptive technology at a highly disruptive price. Given that they have had considerable development costs spanning several years, and probably have much tighter margins than the competition, I'm sure it will take many many more units to be profitable.
I know that 1000 customers are very far from being the whole japanese market. But you [and I] should know to better read the quote I made: the whole overall market of "rara avis" in japan is much bigger than that in Europe, most probably for the fetichist nature of those products. Else I can really not understand the limited runs Pentax and Nikon had made for several of their cameras, even the famous 43 ltd was released, in a limited fashion, with the L39 mount only in Japan.
I don't know what you mean by "rara avis," but if you mean MFDBs, I would be flabbergasted if Japan had a "much larger" market in MFDBs than Europe. Even if we take the higher GDP of Japan and general camera-crazy culture into account: Japan has only quarter the population of European Union.
Limited-run Leicas covered in ostrich foreskin are not a comparable product and are not relevant to this discussion; that's a very different market segment than Pentax 645D.
-
Japan and Korea have marriage portrait markets which are very specific, and "owned" by Fuji.
Edmund
Pentax won't reveal profits from 645D sales, so that is pure conjecture, with no basis even on prevailing business practices. It is quite common for new entrants in high tech to sell products at cost or even at loss to gain market share. The current business jargon for it is disruptive technologies and pricing.
Pentax is entering a new segment with a somewhat disruptive technology at a highly disruptive price. Given that they have had considerable development costs spanning several years, and probably have much tighter margins than the competition, I'm sure it will take many many more units to be profitable.
I don't know what you mean by "rara avis," but if you mean MFDBs, I would be flabbergasted if Japan had a "much larger" market in MFDBs than Europe. Even if we take the higher GDP of Japan and general camera-crazy culture into account: Japan has only quarter the population of European Union.
Limited-run Leicas covered in ostrich foreskin are not a comparable product and are not relevant to this discussion; that's a very different market segment than Pentax 645D.
-
Strictly talking, if you just want 40MP and a decent live-view screen, this hugly fat and slow machine (and probably competent ) is indeed the best offer. Price is right.
I am afraid the 645D doesn't have live view.
On the other hand, having played with one, I wouldn't call it slow. (H)ugly and fat are relative.
I would call the price very expensive still, but sort of reasonnable considering the context?
But the target IMO is different. When Canon will release a 30MP MK whatever number, and they will, this Pentax may not be seen any more as the Holly grail.
I thought that larger sensors had magical properties?
Cheers,
Bernard
-
"but my latest gizmo bought for video shooting comes in really handy...a magnetic loupe on the screen"
Pschefz, off topic but what loupe are you using?
i am using something called LCDVF....ordered from latvia? poland? works great....had the hoodman loupe, the straps and no magnification were a pain....the zacuto is 3x mag and has a strange mount.....the lcdvf has 2x and a small metal mount with magnets on the loupe....just snaps on and off.....works great for me.....i beleive the zacuto is better for people with glasses?
-
i use one of those Zacuto Finders on one of my 5DII bodies, and it's great for video, but no way would I hand that to a client. And I don't want them that close to me. I want them away from me. But the quality of the Zacuto thing is very high.
The tethering thing is just out of control. Everybody in the room with an opinion.
I'd prefer a body with a four inch LCD, shooting to two CF slots, both accepting RAW files, and with some kind of bluetooth sending a small JPG to an iphone. That way, one AD in the room looking at an iphone, and everybody else on the crew looking at the real scene, preventing problems instead of watching their lack of attention show up on the monitor. Sometimes it's infuriating. Gadgets out of control. I miss the old days, when the stylists looked at the hair and dress in real time, over my shoulder, instead of sitting back and watching TV, and saying, "Oh, that's a good one".
i couldnt agree more....funny thing is that my leaf valeo would send previews to a little pdf via bluetooth....
yes there are situations were tethering is necessary and great (and great to have) but i use it as little as possible now....i dont really like to show the camera either but right now, it is the quickest and easiest way.....and people get the idea ( what polaroid used to be) and everybody can move on.....
what i dont get is why the 1000$ camera grip cant just send a simple jpeg to the iphone....
as for the dmf look, magic....it wont happen on a 44x33 chip and and not really on a 50x40 chip either....
somehow the new sonys nx5/3/... are much more exciting.....for totally different reasons of course.....but it seems they at least try to come up with solutions people actually want....
which is why this pentax creates such a stir.....at last it seems someone was listening to what people have been asking for and complaining about....
i also feel the remaining companies are so worked up looking at each other without really taking a step back and thinking/ redesigning for a second...
i mean is anyone really interested in another alternative to c1? i am all for options but who cares about phocus for dslr for the mac? couldnt those resources have been used better/ more productive....this such an obvious jab only designed to hurt phase....
either way, just shot an actress with the 5dIi today....no mf camera could have kept up with changing light, inside/outside, fast shooting.....everything looked great on the lcd and she and her management were happy.....she did things and i was able to keep with what she was doing because i was able to shoot fast.....and i use manual focus lenses.....so i am not a spray and pray guy.....i doubt the pentax would have given me anything i did not have today.....but i am pretty sure the 5diii will and still give me a great preview and amazing skintone/texture out of camera......and that is what i need most....
-
Some seem to consider the Pentax a competitor for Phase and Hassy, but IMO it is more serious option for the next generation of CaNiKons DSLRs.
Strictly talking, if you just want 40MP and a decent live-view screen, this hugly fat and slow machine (and probably competent ) is indeed the best offer. Price is right.
.
But the target IMO is different. When Canon will release a 30MP MK whatever number, and they will, this Pentax may not be seen any more as the Holly grail.
The current 20mp+ crop of DSLR are already very diffraction limited.
When you stop down from f8 to f11 the loss of detail is quite significant, not mentioning f16.
I believe that most of the studio/fashion/ad/portrait photographers, what ever they are using a Canon, Nikon or Sony of more than 20mp, are experiencing this fact.
Going up to 30mpx and plus on a 24-36mm sensor will be challenging and may not offer any tangible improvement on the final results.
A larger sensor of 40mp will always offer an advantage that DSLR will not be able to overcome.
The Pentax is butt ugly, but it seems that it has a very good interface in terms of buttons and menus, definitively better than mamiya/phase and maybe hasselblad as well.
Then as you pointed out, ther may be shortage of lenses and lack of customer care.
Though pentax products are well distributed around the world if compared to other MF offering and you cannot exactly fix any Hasselblad and phase around the corner in any city.
Fedex and UPS are the best partners of these companies.
-
I Like this Pentax, but my point is that not everybody wants to get rid of their back flexibility. I won't.
I do not see the flexibility.
With 10 grands pentax offer a whole new camera with sensor, where elsewhere you need at least 17 grands for the whole thing or 6 grands for a body with nothing.....
-
Ditto
I know this is totally beating a dead horse yet again, but I have to totally agree
What's up with Phase and the absolutely horrid LCD, I can actually see what I'm doing on the 5D2 and feel comfortable enough to show it to AD's and CD's on location.
Even my little GF-1 has a pretty killer LCD.
I just don't get why this company doesn't get it!!!
and for the record I use C-1 and like phase, but this is just the one thing that I just can't understand...
anyways
am
I understand it very well instead...
They did not improve the LCD, because simply could get away with it since most of the competitors did not have anything better.
-
I do not see the flexibility.
With 10 grands pentax offer a whole new camera with sensor, where elsewhere you need at least 17 grands for the whole thing or 6 grands for a body with nothing.....
Street price in Tokyo is actually closer to 8.000 US$ (754.000 Yen).
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Bernard, I have no doubts that large sensors have "magic properties"! But size is not all.
The impression that drives me to feel this Pentax more a competitor to "Canon's and Co" than to "Phase and Co" was not for the sensor's reason.
Well, ugly (sorry for the H, I always make that mistake over and over again), is relative as you point.
In fact to my eyes it looks like a german wwII machine, but the film version did as well.
It is like a Chiyonofuji Mitsugu Pentax DSLR. An inflated muscled version of their current gear.
About the interface implementation, being a DSLR Pentax user, it is exactly the same. Anyone who comes from current Pentax gear will feel completly at home. They wisedly save in devellopement costs by taking in fact the overall design of their current gear.
I must say that the Pentaxes design is well thought, not being perfect but who is?. f.e green button is great in their dslr but they could have done some "green" functions better. (for example changing modes does not keep in memory the last setting...wich virtually makes it useless). Details like that.
About the Live view, I wrote without thinking, or more exactly thinking with my wishes. I mean Better LCD than what's available right now and that is indeed a very very good news. But we are again in the tether stuff and all the circus involved, and that is why I think that the way this Pentax will deal in studio configuration will be relevant for this marketplace.
Studios and MF photographers have already invested in MF gear, and the Pentax will have to offer better performance to sell like hot-dogs.
For the Landscaper and the weddinger I have no doubt that this will be a fantastic camera, in the studio I am much more reserved.
The tethered has become a standart because of the manufacturers, but what will happen if you got backward? No more tether but just a big nice LCD...
the idea is great, but as I pointed, the clients are used to the tether stuff and what happen when you take-away the boy's toy? This concept sounds irrelevant, but I do think it could be a problem more than a solution. IMO, the "only" way is to improove the tether configuration and not so much get rid-off it.
But it is true than MF manufacturers have to work now seriously on that and stop teasing with the Lcd screen etc...
This Camera is a little between a rock and a hard place. Canon's gives already the best performance-universality-hassle-free, and 21MP is enough for most of the applications. Then, on the other hand, the Phase and Hassy and others are covering the high-end necessities, yes, at scandalous prices.
A back can be mounted on different cameras, view cameras etc...you are not stuck into a body, and on the contrary do not have to change a body when upgrade.
In fact, this Pentax is today a direct competitor of the Leica S2, and of course will beat it. At 7000 euros!...the S2 is also between a rock and a hard place.
Bernard, is the price still too high? yes, it is always too high. But they officialy announced through their importer that it will be available in August here at about 7000euros. It is high, yes, but compare to the competition not at all.
The HASSELBLAD H3D-II 31 is sold today in Madrid for exactly 13.914,20€ taxes included. This is twice the price of the Pentax. It is too much.
And of course the double price does not reflect in twice the performance, that is where the problem lays for them now.
But it is also fair to give them another universality, lenses and gear already available. This is the weaker point so far of this Pentax.
And yes, pentax distribution is much wider, but beware: it's not Canon neither Nikon. When I want some Pentax accessories here they are never available in shop.
Unthinkable with Canon...so yes, Pentax has a wider distribution infrastructure but...
Hassy, Phase and others will have to do the homeworks much better anyway.
Sinar for example is on the right track, they know they can't compeat with prices so they put their efforts on a really impressive service.
I think the customer service will play a major role for the MF brands within the next years.
Regards.
-
I understand it very well instead...
They did not improve the LCD, because simply could get away with it since most of the competitors did not have anything better.
I agree this was probably a factor. And regardless of the quality of the LCD, the limitation of the in camera preview file lessens the advantage of a high resolution LCD, even if one were in place. My sense is that introducing a larger, higher resolution sensor in a Phase One back requires a complete re-design of the chassis (not a bad idea ). But that also means a considerable expense of R&D and essentially time frames for delivery are strained as a new chassis is somewhat of an unknown. Surveying the landscape from 3-4 years ago, Phase One may indeed have concluded that no competitor was prepared to offer enhanced in camera processing and higher resolution LCD's, at least for some time (like maybe this year with Pentax, Oh! and forgot about Sinar *e65*....).
As a result, they may have felt that devoting R&D funds into Sensor Plus and whatever was involved with obtaining and successfully providing the Dalsa 60MP sensor well before any competitor could was a more prudent use of their funds. I'm not advocating their course (having to deal with that LCD has been incredibly frustrating) but I could see where this might have been part of the strategy and from that perspective, while I might not agree with it, I could understand the rational.
Note - this is only my personal speculation and consideration. Over the years, I have asked each manufacturer I have experience with (Leaf, Hasselblad, Sinar, Phase One) why they don't improve the LCD's and have never gotten an answer I felt made sense. So...this is my own conclusion.
Steve Hendrix
-
I agree this was probably a factor. And regardless of the quality of the LCD, the limitation of the in camera preview file lessens the advantage of a high resolution LCD, even if one were in place. My sense is that introducing a larger, higher resolution sensor in a Phase One back requires a complete re-design of the chassis (not a bad idea ). But that also means a considerable expense of R&D and essentially time frames for delivery are strained as a new chassis is somewhat of an unknown. Surveying the landscape from 3-4 years ago, Phase One may indeed have concluded that no competitor was prepared to offer enhanced in camera processing and higher resolution LCD's, at least for some time (like maybe this year with Pentax, Oh! and forgot about Sinar *e65*....).
As a result, they may have felt that devoting R&D funds into Sensor Plus and whatever was involved with obtaining and successfully providing the Dalsa 60MP sensor well before any competitor could was a more prudent use of their funds. I'm not advocating their course (having to deal with that LCD has been incredibly frustrating) but I could see where this might have been part of the strategy and from that perspective, while I might not agree with it, I could understand the rational.
Note - this is only my personal speculation and consideration. Over the years, I have asked each manufacturer I have experience with (Leaf, Hasselblad, Sinar, Phase One) why they don't improve the LCD's and have never gotten an answer I felt made sense. So...this is my own conclusion.
Steve Hendrix
Steve,
IMO they built their system arrownd the tethered stuff so a great lcd was not relevant in their design. I still do not think it is that much, it would be nice but what is happening is that a new player is putting them in a sort of embarassing position.
I would prefer they improove the tether task and instead of rebuilding sensors designs, that they could work on offering softwares and screen solutions included in the price.
-
As a result, they may have felt that devoting R&D funds into Sensor Plus and whatever was involved with obtaining and successfully providing the Dalsa 60MP sensor well before any competitor could was a more prudent use of their funds. I'm not advocating their course (having to deal with that LCD has been incredibly frustrating) but I could see where this might have been part of the strategy and from that perspective, while I might not agree with it, I could understand the rational.
That is understandable within their business model based on small series/high prices. Not enough cash to handle several projects in parallel.
Now the real question is whether such a business model makes sense in the long run. Are photographers going to accept much longer to spend 5 times more to get a bit more resolution and a lot less convenience? The gap between 40 and 60 megapixel is in fact small when considered in terms of printing size, look at 24 inch instead of 20. Put the other way, it is the difference between being able to print a 24 inch image at 360 dpi vs being able to print it at 300 dpi.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
That is understandable within their business model based on small series/high prices. Not enough cash to handle several projects in parallel.
Now the real question is whether such a business model makes sense in the long run. Are photographers going to accept much longer to spend 5 times more to get a bit more resolution and a lot less convenience? The gap between 40 and 60 megapixel is in fact small when considered in terms of printing size, look at 24 inch instead of 20. Put the other way, it is the difference between being able to print a 24 inch image at 360 dpi vs being able to print it at 300 dpi.
Cheers,
Bernard
I don't think that is exclusively Phase One's long term business model, though it will always be a primary component of it. More resolution, for those that want it, will always be appreciated. I have read for years how X MP's are enough. And then they buy more. To be sure, the lack of significant other enhancements has shrunk the medium format market. But as I said, I don't see that as ignoring it on their part. I believe they want those enhancements and are working on them. But what is ready and makes sense competitively for a given 2-3 year period is what gets released.
And I believe largely, photographers have already made that decision anyway. There hasn't been anything stopping photographers from shooting 35mm and dropping medium format and many of them have - especially commercially (and for many reasons). That started with the original 1DS and really began in ernest with the 5D and 5DMKII. I believe that playing field is largely settled.
We sell to photographers who want medium format and we do very well, though our commercial market is smaller than years ago. We rarely are asked to engage in discussions of 35mm vs medium format. They want medium format and have accepted whatever compromises are in place in exchange for what they value. That isn't to say they don't wish for the same enhancements that we all do.
Steve Hendrix
-
The current 20mp+ crop of DSLR are already very diffraction limited.
When you stop down from f8 to f11 the loss of detail is quite significant, not mentioning f16.
I believe that most of the studio/fashion/ad/portrait photographers, what ever they are using a Canon, Nikon or Sony of more than 20mp, are experiencing this fact.
Going up to 30mpx and plus on a 24-36mm sensor will be challenging and may not offer any tangible improvement on the final results.
A larger sensor of 40mp will always offer an advantage that DSLR will not be able to overcome.
The Pentax is butt ugly, but it seems that it has a very good interface in terms of buttons and menus, definitively better than mamiya/phase and maybe hasselblad as well.
Then as you pointed out, ther may be shortage of lenses and lack of customer care.
Though pentax products are well distributed around the world if compared to other MF offering and you cannot exactly fix any Hasselblad and phase around the corner in any city.
Fedex and UPS are the best partners of these companies.
Diffraction is noticeable with the 25MP DSLRs at f8 or so, but that's not to say that more megapixels isn't welcome. A lens will have the same diffraction regardless of how many megapixels the sensor behind it has. The difference being that you simply see the diffraction more with more megapixels. So you're not better of with less megapixels, when it comes to diffraction, but, rather, the lower resolution just doesn't show the problem. Increasing resolution will still be advantageous at the wider aperture settings, so, if you're an f2 shooter, megapixels going up is a good thing. If you're an F11 shooter, it won't get any better or worse.
-
Diffraction is noticeable with the 25MP DSLRs at f8 or so, but that's not to say that more megapixels isn't welcome. A lens will have the same diffraction regardless of how many megapixels the sensor behind it has. The difference being that you simply see the diffraction more with more megapixels. So you're not better of with less megapixels, when it comes to diffraction, but, rather, the lower resolution just doesn't show the problem. Increasing resolution will still be advantageous at the wider aperture settings, so, if you're an f2 shooter, megapixels going up is a good thing. If you're an F11 shooter, it won't get any better or worse.
for the reason you explained, I believe that photographing at f8 and above we are less likely of seeing tangible improvement on the final output, if we increase the megapixel from 24 to 30 something.
Said that.... when Sony or Canon will announce the next FF camera, I will preorder it.
I believe the size of the sensor and pixel pitch are correlated with diffraction, though they are not the cause as you pointed out.
it seems to me, that images are likely to be less effected by diffraction on a larger sensor.
that is what I see shooting both 24mpx 35mm sensor and Phase one cameras and backs.
with the larger sensor I need of going up to f16/22 before diffraction begin bothering me, were with the 35mm, as you said, already at f8 is a factor, though it bothers really only starting at f11.
-
snip................
As a result, they may have felt that devoting R&D funds into Sensor Plus and whatever was involved with obtaining and successfully providing the Dalsa 60MP sensor well before any competitor could was a more prudent use of their funds. I'm not advocating their course (having to deal with that LCD has been incredibly frustrating) but I could see where this might have been part of the strategy and from that perspective, while I might not agree with it, I could understand the rational.
Note - this is only my personal speculation and consideration. Over the years, I have asked each manufacturer I have experience with (Leaf, Hasselblad, Sinar, Phase One) why they don't improve the LCD's and have never gotten an answer I felt made sense. So...this is my own conclusion.
Steve Hendrix
They can call it allocating resources and I guess that's a polite way to put it, but where I'm from we'd just say some of those medium format boys and girls "fibbed" to us. They fibbed to you too.
We've all heard it, excessive heat build up, battery use, expensive processing power, etc. etc. and I guess it wouldn't be frustrating if the Pentax cost $28,000 and a 40 mpx euro back costs $8,500 but it's the other way round.
Actually, I just think it's the medium format system. They charge a lot, they have limited usability so they sell a limited amount of cameras, which means they have to charge even more.
It just goes round n' round until every non architectural pro-fessional photographer in the world shoots a Canon and the two very best building photographers I know sure use those Canon Tilt shifts . . . a lot.
Now, I'm not complaining because everytime I see one of those DL33, or 10mpx sensor plus e-mail ads I want to write a letter to the makers and say thanky, thanky for not making me spend $25,000.
In fact the strange thing is lately I've used my Contax and digital backs more than ever and except for the tethered goofiness I got going on with V4, and V5, they work as well as they ever did.
At one point I thought about selling them and the Contax' at the standard bargain basement rates we see today, but now I'm glad I didn't.
Personally, I don't think your real competition is Canon (as you said that boat has sailed) or even Pentax, cause that's aimed at the Canon Nikon guys that take pictures of trees. I think your real competition is the used medium format market, because though I don't have a pee 40 or pee 65 to pixel compare next to the 30 and 21 I own, I'd bet dollars to donuts that no client can see or care about the difference. Not at the time of capture, obviously not after rounds of post production.
At this point all I can say is keep those T-mobile cell phone lcd's coming and to keep my investment safe, please make the next innovation a 90mpx sensor. Heck go 120mpx make it 1mm larger and call it super full frame.
I can't wait to see a macbookpro tether to those files.
BC
-
Don't you know that there's just part of PhaseOne that secretly wants to make that Pentax645D ICC profile less than optimum? "Hey Bob, yeah, you've put enough time into that profile -- let's move on to the next one. Just get close enough, and then mark it finished".
You can learn a lot about paranoids, just by following them around.
-
You can learn a lot about paranoids, just by following them around.
Not to go off topic, but . .
A long time ago in a galaxy far, far away, I managed a studio with lots of photographers and crew.
One of the stylists, that was quite talented was infectiously paranoid.
We'd have this weekly talk about this paranoid thing until she finally said, "hey . . . just because I appear paranoid, it doesn't mean that people aren't really out to get me".
I shook my head and kinda laughed, but started watching the studio process a little closer and it was true, other stylists were jacking with her props, slowing up her merch, screwing with her schedule, because she was good and she was competition.
So after that my talks were with the other stylists and the paranoia in the studio stopped.
BC
-
Personally, I don't think your real competition is Canon (as you said that boat has sailed) or even Pentax, cause that's aimed at the Canon Nikon guys that take pictures of trees. I think your real competition is the used medium format market, because though I don't have a pee 40 or pee 65 to pixel compare next to the 30 and 21 I own, I'd bet dollars to donuts that no client can see or care about the difference. Not at the time of capture, obviously not after rounds of post production.
BC
Actually you are absolutly right B.C.
I wrote before that IMO they will competing with the next generation Canons.(steroids 35mm that will probably be very fast)
But reading your post I think you got it right on the money.
It's funny, the old saying: when things are too close we do not see them, and that's what happened.
I'm in that case, and what did I choose? Canon? No: exactly what you just pointed. The second hand MF market.
Regards.
-
Back on thread.
Some real field shots from the 645D at
http://www.nippon-camera.com/s_pentax645d.php (http://www.nippon-camera.com/s_pentax645d.php)
Look at the detail in the buddhist shrine shot at f8 and f11.
I added a little sharpening and the shots really pop.
The color also looks really natural.
I think I'm going to clean my $12K worth of Pantax glass stuck in the closet.
-
Back on thread.
Some real field shots from the 645D at
http://www.nippon-camera.com/s_pentax645d.php (http://www.nippon-camera.com/s_pentax645d.php)
Look at the detail in the buddhist shrine shot at f8 and f11.
I added a little sharpening and the shots really pop.
The color also looks really natural.
I think I'm going to clean my $12K worth of Pantax glass stuck in the closet.
...And get prepared the favorite post prod software for serious retouching as well...
One of the worst blue issue I've seen.
Thanks a lot for sharing.
-
http://www.nippon-camera.com/s_pentax645d.php (http://www.nippon-camera.com/s_pentax645d.php)
Look at ASA 800; very organic and real. To me, more appealing than even ASA 100.
Set it and Forget it.
Very promising. And with a nice, tight 3-inch LCD as well.
June comes after May, right?
-
Look at ASA 800; very organic and real. To me, more appealing than even ASA 100.
Set it and Forget it.
Very promising. And with a nice, tight 3-inch LCD as well.
June comes after May, right?
Agree, ASA 800 is nothing less than excelent, organic as you said.
I also prefer it to the ISO 200
mmm...
-
I think I'm going to clean my $12K worth of Pantax glass stuck in the closet.
You have 51 pentax lenses???
-
When the Pentax 645N was in it's hay day,
believe it or not, typical Pentax 645 zoom lenses used to retail new for $1300 - $1900.
If the 645D is a success, they will be available new in the US again and they won't be cheap.
You have 51 Pentax lenses???
-
Actually you are absolutly right B.C.
I wrote before that IMO they will competing with the next generation Canons.(steroids 35mm that will probably be very fast)
But reading your post I think you got it right on the money.
It's funny, the old saying: when things are too close we do not see them, and that's what happened.
I'm in that case, and what did I choose? Canon? No: exactly what you just pointed. The second hand MF market.
Regards.
Last year I got a "used" back with few hundred captures (probably a demo unit), it was still new and I paid a fair price for it.
In the package the dealer left a leaflet saying all the nice words that good marketing makes say and ended with something on this line "now you will have your back that will serve your for many years".
That is true, and I will hardly buy another one in a long time.
I did a few thousands captures only with it, since i'm using DSLR 99% of the times and when I trave to Europe and I need a back, the clients rent me one. I do not bother carrying my cameras with me if I can.
In the fashion and AD related to fashion photographers field, the only ones who eventually cares about all the subtleties of shooting with a back, are eventually the photographers. otherwise nobody else care.
And 99% photographers in those fields can care less.
If I was to upgrade to a new 40/50 grands medium format package, I feel that the DB dealers are more on competition with my car and furniture dealers.
-
Last year I got a "used" back with few hundred captures (probably a demo unit), it was still new and I paid a fair price for it.
In the package the dealer left a leaflet saying all the nice words that good marketing makes say and ended with something on this line "now you will have your back that will serve your for many years".
That is true, and I will hardly buy another one in a long time.
I did a few thousands captures only with it, since i'm using DSLR 99% of the times and when I trave to Europe and I need a back, the clients rent me one. I do not bother carrying my cameras with me if I can.
In the fashion and AD related to fashion photographers field, the only ones who eventually cares about all the subtleties of shooting with a back, are eventually the photographers. otherwise nobody else care.
And 99% photographers in those fields can care less.
If I was to upgrade to a new 40/50 grands medium format package, I feel that the DB dealers are more on competition with my car and furniture dealers.
Yes Ziocan.
But then that would be also true regarding the Pentax. It is much cheaper and brings on the table impressive features, but as you pointed, at least in the area of fashion it is true that the only one who cares about high-end backs IQ is the photographer.
Canon or Nikon are hassle free, universals (specially Canon), cheaper, faster, lighter etc...Strictly talking, this Pentax is still a classic MF camera.
People who need perspective correction will need the backs, not this pentax, and even, as it has been said before, a tilt-shift Canon will do the job. I actually know a landscape and arquitecture photographer here that bought this year a 5D II and the tilt-shift and he is very happy with it to the point that it has become his first camera.
I think this Pentax will really tempting the landscapers and weddingers and the not-so-wealphy serious amateur.
To me, if I have to invest 7000euros cash on a gear, then I rather take a second-hand back because I can use it on different sort of cameras, or even a new Nikon D3s sold at that price + a decent lens. ( no Bernard, I'm not hill and you read well ).
As megapixels are not all, even buying 2 used first generation backs for that price or one back+ a 5D+laptop...the combinations are indeed extended.
Maybe we'll see very soon the traditional MF manufacturers (Phase, Hassy, Sinar etc...) in the hand of fewer people: very specific needs like museums, research, wealphy photographers that really want the best IQ for themselves, for their personal pleasure, artists that produce very large prints (and that sell high) etc...
If they don't react from now and start to be more creative, bringing new designs, new prices, new customer services etc...their range of potential buyer will reduced in a tiny exclusive niche. Instead of decreasing, prices will be higher. Many small MF brands will probably disapear.
So this is a serious situation for them.
They could for example provide the laptop included in the price to live view tether if they are not willing to improove that in the back itself.
Or provide for free to every buyer a pro website solution included in a bigger brand's web (ex: Phase users) with unlimited disk space, stable html platform, possibilities to generate jpegs in real time, client's control panel with customizations, professional data base with profile etc...
If your work is based on landscape big prints, then this Pentax is indeed a very very good choice. But then you really have to have this money and print big to make it sense. For very little you have a full frame 24MP sony that if not pushed in higher isos, delivers a fantastic IQ, and in prints the differences are not so drastic than on screen.
Also, I'm waiting to hear the current back users and how they will receive the Pentax file in real world. Remember that they are used to ASA 50 and huge room for post prod, and my first impression (it is just a first impression looking at the Pentax files) is that they are a little behind to what the Hassy and Phase and others are currently producing. Some samples are indeed impressive, but...sensor is not all, then all the savoir-faire behind and after. So far, I'm not sure about the room they really give in post-prod. Got the feeling that backs are doing slightly better than the Pentax in that aspect but it has to be confirmed in extensive use.
The today's reality is that this Pentax exists and at the same time, the second hand MF backs market is active and the world is in recession...3 factors that can change the game in the industry.
-
if you really want one, they're taking orders here:
http://www.japantrendshop.com/DE-pentax-645d-p-833.html (http://www.japantrendshop.com/DE-pentax-645d-p-833.html)
you'll find it right between the "dog pedometer from takara tomy" and the "retro cube mini hifi speaker":
http://www.japantrendshop.com/gadgets-c-25...ucts_sort_order (http://www.japantrendshop.com/gadgets-c-25.html?page=6&sort=products_sort_order)
-
Haven't seen this mentioned so far (excuse me if I missed it): four new sample images.
http://bit.ly/cuF9EM (http://bit.ly/cuF9EM)
-
http://bit.ly/cuF9EM (http://bit.ly/cuF9EM)
First image on that page -- really a nice image.
And a side question: when I look at an image like that, I think of Dynamic Range. In MF world, are backs rated in Dynamic Range indexes? Or are the chips inside them rated? Or is it dependent on the software that processes the RAWs?
If I was a landscape photographer I'd be looking at DR more than anything else. Who cares about the LCD as long as you know you didn't clip anything? Is there one camera/back or chip that's thought of as the largest Dynamic Range?
If I was a camera maker, I'd take my cameras to Japan to shoot test images -- the soft grey light extends out the DR to the absolute limit.
-
And a side question: when I look at an image like that, I think of Dynamic Range. In MF world, are backs rated in Dynamic Range indexes? Or are the chips inside them rated? Or is it dependent on the software that processes the RAWs?
If I was a landscape photographer I'd be looking at DR more than anything else. Who cares about the LCD as long as you know you didn't clip anything? Is there one camera/back or chip that's thought of as the largest Dynamic Range?
After hands on testing that is why many of our customers do elect for a Medium Format back.
(one non scientific but very practical definition) of DR is the ability to extract useful detail in highlights and shadows of the original scene. So every single part of the process matters. There are some resources out there (e.g. dXo) which attempt to create a single numerical rating for DR of different cameras. Every such resource I've found is lacking in several ways. In dXo's case they only test the sensor. They do not take into account anything else. They also only use a strict numerical evaluation of the noise level which is a problem because the type of noise is critical: the same signal-to-noise number can look very ugly (color noise in big wavy wonky blobs) or actually quite pleasant (a fine film-like grain).
I've detailed every part of the system before so I won't repeat that here, but as a summary:
lens-coating > lens elements > camera-interior-darkness > IR filter > pixel well type > pixel well size > read-out speed/method > black-frame-read-out > A/D converter > proprietary data (e.g. temperature) > debayer-math > noise reduction > sharpening
Each of these parts of the system can reduce Dynamic Range. Some of these are obvious, others are not. For instance if the inside of the camera is not matte-black enough or the lens coatings are not done well it can create a very low-level haze (like lens flare) which fills light into the shadows and makes it impossible to show detail in the shadows. This is obvious when the flare/fogging is severe but unless you are very careful you can miss it when it is subtle and would only be noticeable if you had a A/B of the scene.
This is the sort of area where the obsessive attention to detail and emphasis on image quality above all else that you find in medium format really shines. The proprietary dark-frame technology, the type of sensor, the read out type, the extent to which the math of Capture One is catered to the sensor, etc etc etc.
The only real way to test is to shoot the same scene with both at a variety of exposures (to allow for the fact that some cameras do better slightly over or underexposed) and then process them in a variety of software. Then make prints, or place on the web, or whatever your normal end-usage is, and see what you think. Take a look at the the gradients from deep shadow to mid-tones, take a look at the color accuracy of objects in shadows, look at harsh light-to-shadow skin transitions (are there ugly orange bands or is smooth and organic), look at recovered cloud details and texture in shadows. Decide for yourself. Many on this board have done this and only one comes to mind (bernard) that doesn't think that MF has a significant lead in this area.
Doug Peterson ()
__________________
Head of Technical Services, Capture Integration
Phase One, Leaf, Cambo, Canon, Apple, Profoto, Eizo & More
National: 877.217.9870 | Cell: 740.707.2183
Newsletter: Read Latest or Sign Up (http://www.captureintegration.com/our-company/newsletters/)
RSS Feed: Subscribe (http://www.captureintegration.com/2008/08/11/rss-feeds/)
Buy Capture One at 10% off (http://www.captureintegration.com/phase-one/buy-capture-one/)
Personal Work (http://www.doug-peterson.com/)
-
The only real way to test is to shoot the same scene with both at a variety of exposures
Imagine in this test image from Pentax 645D:
http://photo1.ganref.jp/impression/0/366/645d_smp_01_l.jpg (http://photo1.ganref.jp/impression/0/366/645d_smp_01_l.jpg)
If harsh sunlight had been hitting those blossoms or blooms in the foreground that are light green. I'd be curious about, without doing any HocusPocus/HDR or LayerBlending, if you just processed out the one raw, with everything set to zero in the software, would you still hold detail deep into that forest? I guess I know the answer would be: No you wouldn't, but I'd like to know how bad would it look? And would there be a real difference between Hassie and Phase, and or a difference between MF and 5DMII? Would there be a huge difference or just a small difference? Thanks.
-
The only real way to test is to shoot the same scene with both at a variety of exposures (to allow for the fact that some cameras do better slightly over or underexposed) and then process them in a variety of software. Then make prints, or place on the web, or whatever your normal end-usage is, and see what you think. Take a look at the the gradients from deep shadow to mid-tones, take a look at the color accuracy of objects in shadows, look at harsh light-to-shadow skin transitions (are there ugly orange bands or is smooth and organic), look at recovered cloud details and texture in shadows. Decide for yourself. Many on this board have done this and only one comes to mind (bernard) that doesn't think that MF has a significant lead in this area.
Doug,
Four things:
1. Have we been using the same DSLRs as a base for our comparision? Having recently played with 5DII files I think I understand the gap if you have been basing your opinion on these,
2. I have never claimed to have done detailed comparisions with a phase back.
3. I am not denying that there is probably some advantage in favor of the back (although I don't see any compared to my ZD), just that it is very far from being as huge as some have claimed on this very site.
4. A system being calibrated for slight under-exposure gives the impression to have more DR because it makes highlight recovery easier. This isn't DR.
As far as the 645D there are no reasons to think it will not be as good or better than the other backs using a similar sensor. Pentax has just as much experience as any other player in the industry, and probably more than some back manufacturers.
Looking at these new samples I still see some of the painterly look I dislike on details near the cut off frequency (the distant small leaves) and I prefer the way my D3x handles such details, but the effect is well controlled IMHO.
Regards,
Bernard
-
If harsh sunlight had been hitting those blossoms or blooms in the foreground that are light green. I'd be curious about, without doing any HocusPocus/HDR or LayerBlending, if you just processed out the one raw, with everything set to zero in the software, would you still hold detail deep into that forest? I guess I know the answer would be: No you wouldn't, but I'd like to know how bad would it look? And would there be a real difference between Hassie and Phase, and or a difference between MF and 5DMII? Would there be a huge difference or just a small difference? Thanks.
With software set to zero there would be very little difference (except perhaps in the transitions between blown out and held highlights).
For very good reason: if C1's default setting showed the entire tone range captured by a modern digital back it most images would look very very flat (meaning lacking in contrast). The default settings in the software are very little more than a marketing decision (when people open a file for the first time ever what will it look like).
The dynamic range would become apparent when you used exposure, contrast, highlight/shadow recovery, curves or other tools to ask the program to show you more detail in the highlights and shadows.
Interestingly dynamic range also plays a large role in performance under mixed light with an unfiltered lens. When you shoot in tungsten for instance you are underexposing-at-capture the blue channel and then pushing-at-process the blue channels when you neutralize the WB. So if your camera has less DR it will not be able to push the blue channel data with pleasing results and you'll end up with shadow noise, bad shadow color accuracy, blotchy tonal transitions in the shadow, and poor detail/texture in the shadows (i.e. poor DR).
DR is also the quality feature you are drawing on when you accidentally over expose or under expose an image and need to push/pull the overall exposure. Not that any photographer ever does that! :-)
Doug Peterson ()
__________________
Head of Technical Services, Capture Integration
Phase One, Leaf, Cambo, Canon, Apple, Profoto, Eizo & More
National: 877.217.9870 | Cell: 740.707.2183
Newsletter: Read Latest or Sign Up (http://www.captureintegration.com/our-company/newsletters/)
RSS Feed: Subscribe (http://www.captureintegration.com/2008/08/11/rss-feeds/)
Buy Capture One at 10% off (http://www.captureintegration.com/phase-one/buy-capture-one/)
Personal Work (http://www.doug-peterson.com/)
-
1. Have we been using the same DSLRs as a base for our comparision? Having recently played with 5DII files I think I understand the gap if you have been basing your opinion on these,
2. I have never claimed to have done detailed comparisions with a phase back.
3. I am not denying that there is probably some advantage in favor of the back (although I don't see any compared to my ZD), just that it is very far from being as huge as some have claimed on this very site.
4. A system being calibrated for slight under-exposure gives the impression to have more DR because it makes highlight recovery easier. This isn't DR.
Bernard, my inclusion of your name was not meant as any type of slant. Having read your posts for a good while now I know you are a very intelligent photographer who carefully asses his gear and workflow to make sure they are the best tools for the style of photography you are after.
I would agree the difference is not as large as some here have stated it. I would also say its larger than some have stated it :-). As always the truth lies somewhere in between.
We are not using the same gear. I have significantly more experience with Canon than Nikon (we only recently became a Nikon dealer). While the ZD is no slouch if you had the chance to test it against, for instance, a Phase One P+ back you might find that the ZD does not represent the quality possible from other digital backs. Interestingly a ZD body is a bit less expensive than a D3X.
If you ever want to bring a D3X to Miami I would love to have a couple beers with you and maybe we can also do some testing :-).
I thought I had read you having done testing (for your own purposes) with a phase back, but come to think of it, maybe it was with a ZD. It's possible I'm also confusing someone else's post for yours as reading forums tends to blur together.
Fully agreed that people trick themselves into feeling that under exposing means more DR. As I stated before when testing you would take a variety of exposures and then see what the best result you could get out of each was (paying attention to both the shadows and highlights).
Hope you didn't take any offense. I have deep respect for you as a photographer who has figured out exactly how to accomplish his artist goals and your imagery is fantastic.
Pentax has just as much experience as any other player in the industry, and probably more than most back manufacturers.
Phase released its first digital system (scan back) in 1996 and it's first modern CCD sensor digital back in 1998. Leaf released its first digital system in 1992. Just saying :-) [this is NOT a slant against Pentax, just some perspective on how long the current back manufacturers have been making and refining the support parts, construction techniques, heatsinks, firmware, and raw processing]
Doug Peterson ()
__________________
Head of Technical Services, Capture Integration
Phase One, Leaf, Cambo, Canon, Apple, Profoto, Eizo & More
National: 877.217.9870 | Cell: 740.707.2183
Newsletter: Read Latest or Sign Up (http://www.captureintegration.com/our-company/newsletters/)
RSS Feed: Subscribe (http://www.captureintegration.com/2008/08/11/rss-feeds/)
Buy Capture One at 10% off (http://www.captureintegration.com/phase-one/buy-capture-one/)
Personal Work (http://www.doug-peterson.com/)
-
Hi All,
More 645D full resolution images, including a full resolution DNG
See http://translate.google.com/translate?js=y...sl=ja&tl=en (http://translate.google.com/translate?js=y&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&layout=1&eotf=1&u=http%3A%2F%2Fganref.jp%2Fmagazines%2Findex%2F1%2F0%2F368&sl=ja&tl=en)
Enjoy...
-
Hi All,
More 645D full resolution images, including a full resolution DNG
See http://translate.google.com/translate?js=y...sl=ja&tl=en (http://translate.google.com/translate?js=y&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&layout=1&eotf=1&u=http%3A%2F%2Fganref.jp%2Fmagazines%2Findex%2F1%2F0%2F368&sl=ja&tl=en)
Enjoy...
Thanks for the link!
The DNG of the village looks very promising.
-
Hi All,
More 645D full resolution images, including a full resolution DNG
See http://translate.google.com/translate?js=y...sl=ja&tl=en (http://translate.google.com/translate?js=y&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&layout=1&eotf=1&u=http%3A%2F%2Fganref.jp%2Fmagazines%2Findex%2F1%2F0%2F368&sl=ja&tl=en)
That sounds pretty good to me.
The gap between the jpg and DNG conversion is obviously pretty large in terms of micro details. The ACR file shows little artifacts.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Looks quite good to me as well.
Silly question...., since it may have been debated elsewhere in the forum, but I cannot find it:
If I understood well, the pentax does not even have a usb port, therefore tethered shooting is not even an option for this model?
-
Looks quite good to me as well.
Silly question...., since it may have been debated elsewhere in the forum, but I cannot find it:
If I understood well, the pentax does not even have a usb port, therefore tethered shooting is not even an option for this model?
I don't know about tethered shooting with the 645D, but the specifications published seem to include both USB2.0 and HDMI.
http://www.dpreview.com/news/1003/10031002...x645d.asp#specs (http://www.dpreview.com/news/1003/10031002pentax645d.asp#specs)
-
The plot thickens
Image comparison 5Dmk2 vs 645D
See http://translate.google.com/translate?js=y...sl=ja&tl=en (http://translate.google.com/translate?js=y&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&layout=1&eotf=1&u=http%3A%2F%2Fganref.jp%2Fmagazine%2Fdcm%2Fmag%2F10_06%2F645d%2F&sl=ja&tl=en)
-
I don't know about tethered shooting with the 645D, but the specifications published seem to include both USB2.0 and HDMI.
http://www.dpreview.com/news/1003/10031002...x645d.asp#specs (http://www.dpreview.com/news/1003/10031002pentax645d.asp#specs)
Thank you.
On that case, there is hope of tethered shooting in the future, even with this model.
HDMI port, could also be a decent interim solution.
-
The plot thickens
Image comparison 5Dmk2 vs 645D
See http://translate.google.com/translate?js=y...sl=ja&tl=en (http://translate.google.com/translate?js=y&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&layout=1&eotf=1&u=http%3A%2F%2Fganref.jp%2Fmagazine%2Fdcm%2Fmag%2F10_06%2F645d%2F&sl=ja&tl=en)
when looking at the comparison shots of the purple flowers, I noticed a lack of tonal range(is that the right term for it) around the edges of the flowers. Transitions on the 645d file were smooth, but on the 5dII file, there were distinctive lines that I noticed. But since I don't have a fancy whizbang $5k monitor to view these on, only my prev. gen MBP 15", maybe my screen isn't "up to par".
and fine details(wherever its sharp in either file) is MUCH smoother IMO on the 645d file vs. the 5dII file.
just my $.02
-Dan
-
Compare their 645D landscape:
http://ganref.jp/magazine/dcm/mag/10_06/645d/100607703.jpg (http://ganref.jp/magazine/dcm/mag/10_06/645d/100607703.jpg)
With their 5DII landscape:
http://ganref.jp/magazine/dcm/mag/10_06/645d/100607706.jpg (http://ganref.jp/magazine/dcm/mag/10_06/645d/100607706.jpg)
Firstly the 5DII image is terrible (very soft, low contrast etc). The camera is capable of much better. Possibly a poor choice of lens, camera shake (though 1/800 should have been enough) or focused too far forward. The mid to distant detail is really soft.
In comparison the Pentax file looks mind bogglingly superior, but to me there is still something off about it. It’s like it’s showing the effects of over sharpening but at the same time lacking those really fine details I would have expected from a medium format without an AA filter. Maybe again, the shooting conditions were not ideal, or this is a JPG straight from the camera without the benefit of later, more suitable RAW conversion?
If we look at width only (5616 Canon, 7264 Pentax) you’re not gaining that much, maybe 30%. Certainly stitching a couple of 5DII frames together with a generous overlap would yield much more resolution. I loathe stitching however, that’s why I’m trying to get excited about this Pentax. As a landscape photographer I’m intrigued by the it (given the price), but not overwhelmed with camera lust as I thought I might be.
I know nothing about their lens range. Do they have something with sharp corners in 16-35 (35mm equiv) range?
-
The problem with MF is not the backs, it's the cameras and sometimes the lenses.
Maybe Pentax will change that. At least they have a decent LCD.
My poor man's way of getting a Pentax might be to swap my Mamiya P45+ for a Contax mount
Edmund
-
Many on this board have done this and only one comes to mind (bernard) that doesn't think that MF has a significant lead in this area.
Doug Peterson ()
__________________
Head of Technical Services, Capture Integration
Phase One, Leaf, Cambo, Canon, Apple, Profoto, Eizo & More
National: 877.217.9870 | Cell: 740.707.2183
Newsletter: Read Latest or Sign Up (http://www.captureintegration.com/our-company/newsletters/)
RSS Feed: Subscribe (http://www.captureintegration.com/2008/08/11/rss-feeds/)
Buy Capture One at 10% off (http://www.captureintegration.com/phase-one/buy-capture-one/)
Personal Work (http://www.doug-peterson.com/)
doug you can add me to the bernard list .
after some years of working ( and sometimnes testing ) with many types of cameras, backs and softwares i think the differences in DR between mf and e.g. a 5dmk2 are very small. so small that the sample variation between several backs is larger than the difference between the systems per se.
ofcourse you are 100% right that the type of noise is what makes the shadows look good or bad ( and what makes the 5dmk2 looking as good as it does ... ).
same about the clipping of highlights. if there are casts to magenta or cyan in this clipped areas its way less usable than if the regions stay grey, if one or two channels are blown out.
-
......snip..................
after some years of working ( and sometimnes testing ) with many types of cameras, backs and softwares i think the differences in DR between mf and e.g. a 5dmk2 are very small. so small that the sample variation between several backs is larger than the difference between the systems per se.
ofcourse you are 100% right that the type of noise is what makes the shadows look good or bad ( and what makes the 5dmk2 looking as good as it does ... ).
same about the clipping of highlights. if there are casts to magenta or cyan in this clipped areas its way less usable than if the regions stay grey, if one or two channels are blown out.
If I'm working in studio, with flash, I find the digital backs (at least the phase backs I own) to have a lot more detail and a much deeper file to work in post.
But for me it starts and stops with flash in studio, maybe location if there is no continuous ambient light.
Now if I work with any continuous light, especially mixed lighting, I find the exact opposite and having shot the 5d2, next to my phase backs, in these conditions the Canon has at least as much dr or whatever anyone wants to call it and overall is a much easier file to work. The detail I find even between the Canon and the Phase with continuous light.
At 400 iso I find the shadow noise with my backs to be much more pronounced (and not near as pretty) as the Canon, but the biggest killer for me working with continuous and ambient light and the phase backs is the color proliferation. They seem to be tuned to pick up every single color in the room and we are always painting out blotches in skin, or contamination from some ambient light, even backlight.
Shooting outside, in ambient light, let's say shade under a tree, the green of the grass just illuminates the subject in yellow/green where with the Canons the skintones actually have skin color.
This isn't a knock on phase or a rave on about Canon, I just believe that different makers tune their systems for different applications and if I was only shooting flash in blacked out studios or non people based images like food I'd be fine with the Phase backs for about everything, though I don't work in just one genre or set of circumstances and rarely shoot anything that's not breathing.
Regardless of my experience with multiple cameras, a lot of this comes down to personal taste, or lighting styles, though given all of that, I find it amazing that Pentax and every maker always compares their files to the 5d2 which even at the lowest price medium format system is still 1/3 of the costs.
BC
-
The best test yet of the 645D with lots of samples.
See http://translate.google.com/translate?js=y...sl=ja&tl=en (http://translate.google.com/translate?js=y&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&layout=1&eotf=1&u=http%3A%2F%2Fdc.watch.impress.co.jp%2Fdocs%2Freview%2Fnewproduct%2F20100604_371978.html&sl=ja&tl=en)
I'm amazed at the lack of moire in some of the shots.
I don't know how Pentax pulls this off, or maybe I'm missing something.
The naturalness of the color also is impressive.
I don't shoot people so I can't comment on skin tones.
-
Sorry if you find this post tech useless, but
What I still do not understand is: why can't we finally have now in 2010 a CMOS MF sensor??
What's wrong with that?
-
Sorry if you find this post tech useless, but
What I still do not understand is: why can't we finally have now in 2010 a CMOS MF sensor??
What's wrong with that?
CCD's are still capable of better IQ at base ISO.
-
CCD's are still capable of better IQ at base ISO.
But image quality is over rated and I am not interested in base iso. I want to shoot mf at asa 1000-1600.
-
sorry, repost.
Why can't you delete a post here?
-
If I'm working in studio, with flash, I find the digital backs (at least the phase backs I own) to have a lot more detail and a much deeper file to work in post.
But for me it starts and stops with flash in studio, maybe location if there is no continuous ambient light.
Now if I work with any continuous light, especially mixed lighting, I find the exact opposite and having shot the 5d2, next to my phase backs, in these conditions the Canon has at least as much dr or whatever anyone wants to call it and overall is a much easier file to work. The detail I find even between the Canon and the Phase with continuous light.
At 400 iso I find the shadow noise with my backs to be much more pronounced (and not near as pretty) as the Canon, but the biggest killer for me working with continuous and ambient light and the phase backs is the color proliferation. They seem to be tuned to pick up every single color in the room and we are always painting out blotches in skin, or contamination from some ambient light, even backlight.
Shooting outside, in ambient light, let's say shade under a tree, the green of the grass just illuminates the subject in yellow/green where with the Canons the skintones actually have skin color.
This isn't a knock on phase or a rave on about Canon, I just believe that different makers tune their systems for different applications and if I was only shooting flash in blacked out studios or non people based images like food I'd be fine with the Phase backs for about everything, though I don't work in just one genre or set of circumstances and rarely shoot anything that's not breathing.
Regardless of my experience with multiple cameras, a lot of this comes down to personal taste, or lighting styles, though given all of that, I find it amazing that Pentax and every maker always compares their files to the 5d2 which even at the lowest price medium format system is still 1/3 of the costs.
BC
i am just travelling through the states shooting many buildings in many cities, being asked and budgeted for the best i can do ...
and i took the luxury to shoot several shots side by side with my artek and my canon, comparing after editing which was looking better.
came out what? 50% for each system. of course the other 50% of each system would be usable shots also, these just felt a bit apart for several reasons and i choosed the ones which were looking simply better from each system. most important here are not the back or camera decision, 14 or 16bit, a bit more or less noise or resolution, most important are the lenses. and here the least important factor is the pure sharpness ( although i still like that the rodenstocks are tack sharp even wide open, compared with the schneiders - but the canons are too and shifted it doesnt matter to stop them down because the canon can make exposures as long i ever need ) . everything goes about distortion correction, and here not only about edge correction also about center correction ( if u have long tall buildings in the middle of the frame the difference in this might look as heaven and hell ). and about flare for interior shots or night shots. i talk about big interiors where you even have not to start to put flashes out but have 1000 lamps shining with 5 different light temperatures directly in the lense.
before canon brought out the new 17 and 24mm shifts i wouldnt have dreamed from such 1:1 comparison or at least not from similar hi-end usable results without making handstands in stitching images with the canon system andwhatever exotic shift lenses or shift lense adapters. but now the cards have been mixed again. my results are funny cause they tell me that either i`ll go on to shoot in parallel and carry around the double stuff or i can decide for one of both systems and will end up with the same final quality, doesnt matter with which i`ll shoot.
but there are so much more factors in this game than just resolution and/or if the back finally can make some nice iso400 results ( which i dont care in any case).
if i would believe that a p/h/a10/50/60/65/100 would bring up my image quality in any visible/usable way either for me ( and my own work ) or for my clients and their needs, in two weeks i would have one. but i am so less convinced right now of the mf advantages .... but on the contrary i will immediately buy the new 1ds4 just to sell it 9 months later if the 5dmk3 will be out ... ( i hate the big clumsy 1d bodies ).
-
The best test yet of the 645D with lots of samples.
See http://translate.google.com/translate?js=y...sl=ja&tl=en (http://translate.google.com/translate?js=y&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&layout=1&eotf=1&u=http%3A%2F%2Fdc.watch.impress.co.jp%2Fdocs%2Freview%2Fnewproduct%2F20100604_371978.html&sl=ja&tl=en)
I'm amazed at the lack of moire in some of the shots.
I don't know how Pentax pulls this off, or maybe I'm missing something.
Good processing I guess.
The jpg image of the first distant landscape shows a lot of moire in the tiles of the facade bottom/right third, but the DNG conversion is much cleaner.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Hi,
Could probably be done, but DALSA and Kodak makes CCD sensors and Canon/Sony/Panasonic makes CMOS sensors for DSLRs. I don't think there is any real evidence for the superiority of either technology. Read noise may be lower on CMOS (using correlated double sampling and possibly on chip pre amplifiers) but noise is normally limited by shot noise (variation if the number of photons reaching the sensor).
I don't think that either technology is a magic bullet. A bigger sensor collects more photons and therefore has less noise. This does not explain any "magic" differences between DSLRs and MFDBs, the difference should be around one stop.
Best regards
Erik
Sorry if you find this post tech useless, but
What I still do not understand is: why can't we finally have now in 2010 a CMOS MF sensor??
What's wrong with that?
-
Could probably be done, but DALSA and Kodak makes CCD sensors and Canon/Sony/Panasonic makes CMOS sensors for DSLRs.
And then comes the question of what neither Dalsa nor Kodak makes large CMOS sensors for cameras, even though Dalsa also makes very large custom CMOS sensors (for X-ray equipment and such), and Kodak did make CMOS sensors, but dropped them a while ago.
My guess is that this is because:
a. the main IQ advantage of CMOS sensors is in low light sensitivity (high ISO speeds), and even then only with noise control technology that first Canon and then Sony and Panasonic have developed, but the far smaller Dalsa/Kodak CMOS efforts have not yet,
b. the Dalsa and Kodak large sensor divisions are driven by industrial, military, medical and scientific customers who do not need extremes of high sensitivity except in situations where high sensitivity and great dynamic range are both desired, like some X-ray equipment, and this combination is best achieved with very large photosites, where CCD works reasonably well. Kodak makes sensors of about 50x50mm with very good low signal sensitivity, but they are only 4MP, with huge 24 micron pixel spacing.
Some references to indicate what the Dalsa and Kodak sensor divisions are mainly interested in:
A. For CMOS sensors up to wafer size, and even beyond to 300x240mm (but with slightly visible seams) from Dalsa:
http://www.dalsa.com/sensors/Products/custom.aspx (http://www.dalsa.com/sensors/Products/custom.aspx)
B. For big, square CCD sensors with really big photosites from Kodak:
http://www.kodak.com:80/global/plugins/acr...ductSummary.pdf (http://www.kodak.com:80/global/plugins/acrobat/en/business/ISS/productsummary/FullFrame/KAF-4320ProductSummary.pdf)
-
The biggest advantage that CMOS appears to have over CCD is possibility of live view.
Having live view for a medium-format digital back could have a significant impact for the users of "technical cameras" such as the Alpa, Arca rm3d, or Sinar ArTec. It would eliminate the need for a sliding back to change between a ground-glass and the back (or the risk of removing the back). It would also eliminate the need for a rangefinder (ie. laser or sonic) or other focusing aid.
Live view might not eliminate the MF SLR style of camera, like the Pentax, but it would provide a second, more precise method of operation with SLR cameras.
-
B. For big, square CCD sensors with really big photosites from Kodak:
http://www.kodak.com:80/global/plugins/acr...ductSummary.pdf (http://www.kodak.com:80/global/plugins/acrobat/en/business/ISS/productsummary/FullFrame/KAF-4320ProductSummary.pdf)
Wow! A 50mm x 50mm square sensor with 15 stops DR - sounds perfect! I'll take one of these for my Rollei 6008 please!
-
If I'm working in studio, with flash, I find the digital backs (at least the phase backs I own) to have a lot more detail and a much deeper file to work in post.
But for me it starts and stops with flash in studio, maybe location if there is no continuous ambient light.
Now if I work with any continuous light, especially mixed lighting, I find the exact opposite and having shot the 5d2, next to my phase backs, in these conditions the Canon has at least as much dr or whatever anyone wants to call it and overall is a much easier file to work. The detail I find even between the Canon and the Phase with continuous light.
At 400 iso I find the shadow noise with my backs to be much more pronounced (and not near as pretty) as the Canon, but the biggest killer for me working with continuous and ambient light and the phase backs is the color proliferation. They seem to be tuned to pick up every single color in the room and we are always painting out blotches in skin, or contamination from some ambient light, even backlight
Yep that's about right.
At base or low ISO the P30 has much more fidelity / file-flexibility. At higher ISOs the Canon has more fidelity / file flexibility.
That's one reason why Phase developed the Sensor+ system which allows you to gain two stops of ISO without any loss in quality (though at a lower pixel resolution) so that you can retain the enormous file-flexibility and fidelity of the image as you increase the ISO.
Color accuracy always comes at the price of color accuracy :-). Being able to distinguish very subtle variations in color and areas of low saturation is great when doing product photography / art reproduction / landscape but not so great for fashion in uncontrolled lighting environments. Personally I'd rather have the accuracy and retouch out any undesirable accuracy than to have a camera which cannot pick up on subtle colors. I've had more than a few calls from photographers who had dSLRs that could not pick up the difference between two thread colors in an outfit (usually red), two hair shades, two paint colors etc and the client was not happy.
The Skin Tone tab in the Color Editor can create a gorgeous skin-tone profile (either a generic one that works pretty well for most models, or a very specific one that works perfectly for a specific model)
Doug Peterson ()
__________________
Head of Technical Services, Capture Integration
Phase One, Leaf, Cambo, Canon, Apple, Profoto, Eizo & More
National: 877.217.9870 | Cell: 740.707.2183
Newsletter: Read Latest or Sign Up (http://www.captureintegration.com/our-company/newsletters/)
RSS Feed: Subscribe (http://www.captureintegration.com/2008/08/11/rss-feeds/)
Buy Capture One at 10% off (http://www.captureintegration.com/phase-one/buy-capture-one/)
Personal Work (http://www.doug-peterson.com/)
-
but not so great for fashion in uncontrolled lighting environments. Personally I'd rather have the accuracy and retouch out any undesirable accuracy than to have a camera which cannot pick up on subtle colors. I've had more than a few calls from photographers who had dSLRs that could not pick up the difference between two thread colors in an outfit (usually red), two hair shades, two paint colors etc and the client was not happy.
The Skin Tone tab in the Color Editor can create a gorgeous skin-tone profile (either a generic one that works pretty well for most models, or a very specific one that works perfectly for a specific model)
I'm not talking about uncontrolled lighting, I'm saying if you go out side on green grass with a 12x rag over the talent, expect yellow/green people and yes that's a big deal to fix.
I've tried that skintone thing, it's ok, nothing that keeps you out of the paint brush and photoshop, but the medium format backs I own are just too damn color sensitive. They see every blotch, every slight variation in skin tone and you can't globally correct for that. I guess the skin tone editor thing would work better if you shot blue clothes, blue backgrounds and blue makeup, then it could single out the skintones, but it's not a fix and don't believe, then set it up next to the Canons and have a go at it with anything other than one softbox pointed at a face.
Try it and show it.
BC
-
Hi,
That's just 4 MP. If you downsample a 40 MP sensor to 4 MP you would get about the same DR. The Kodak sensor has a lot of read noise, BTW, around 20 electrons that would reduce DR to around 25000:1.
So, you would be better of with a smaller pitch sensor in almost all cases. If you need a 50mm x 50mm square sensor, it's a different case, but how much are you willing to pay for that?
Just to explain how it works:
The Kodak sensor has few but large pixels, so each pixel can hold about 500000 electrons. A 40 MP digital back may hold about 60000 electrons in each pixel. If we downsample the 40 MP sensor to 4 MP we get about 600000 electrons per (downsampled) pixel. In practice DR is limited by shot noise (random variation of photons falling on sensor pixels) and that variation would be the same weather 4 MP (downsampled) or 4 MP (real).
Best regards
Erik
Wow! A 50mm x 50mm square sensor with 15 stops DR - sounds perfect! I'll take one of these for my Rollei 6008 please!
-
I'm not talking about uncontrolled lighting, I'm saying if you go out side on green grass with a 12x rag over the talent, expect yellow/green people and yes that's a big deal to fix.
I've tried that skintone thing, it's ok, nothing that keeps you out of the paint brush and photoshop, but the medium format backs I own are just too damn color sensitive. They see every blotch, every slight variation in skin tone and you can't globally correct for that. I guess the skin tone editor thing would work better if you shot blue clothes, blue backgrounds and blue makeup, then it could single out the skintones, but it's not a fix and don't believe, then set it up next to the Canons and have a go at it with anything other than one softbox pointed at a face.
Try it and show it.
BC
I totally agree.....some by the name of James wrote here a little while ago that the dmf backs show it in your models face if a red car drives by outside the studio.....and I completely agree.....
i always laugh when people talk about correct color.....most skin tones I see in print don't actually exist....but they look pleasant....
yes, there are situations where color is very important (fabrics, product,....) but in my experience the dmf backs don't really have a much better track record then the dslrs.....and when you take moire into consideration the choice is clear again...
I am surprised to read about someone like rainer using dslr now.....but then again the 2 architectural photographers I know switched to dslr exclusively in the last year.....but I am with him all the way....I will get whatever canon comes out with next....
I have never liked shooting slrs.....I prefer mf and even rf.....but I really have no choice anymore....
-
I totally agree.....some by the name of James wrote here a little while ago that the dmf backs show it in your models face if a red car drives by outside the studio.....and I completely agree.....
i always laugh when people talk about correct color.....most skin tones I see in print don't actually exist....but they look pleasant....
yes, there are situations where color is very important (fabrics, product,....) but in my experience the dmf backs don't really have a much better track record then the dslrs.....and when you take moire into consideration the choice is clear again...
I am surprised to read about someone like rainer using dslr now.....but then again the 2 architectural photographers I know switched to dslr exclusively in the last year.....but I am with him all the way....I will get whatever canon comes out with next....
I have never liked shooting slrs.....I prefer mf and even rf.....but I really have no choice anymore....
well i havent switched yet. i use both at the moment.
-
well i havent switched yet. i use both at the moment.
i did not want to make it sound like you switched exclusively....2 people i know have....
architectural should really be a stronghold for dmf....and even in that field things are changing.....
on a side note....never got to see that rz33 but afaik it is just a rz with the aptus....which is a great back.....but why can't they make a wlf that makes the finder image look like 6x7? is it THAT hard?
once I hold a H or mamiya (or pentax) up to my eye, it turns into a dslr....only bigger, slower, with a laughable af....
am I the only one who wants what mf used to be?
-
once I hold a H or mamiya (or pentax) up to my eye, it turns into a dslr....only bigger, slower, with a laughable af....
am I the only one who wants what mf used to be?
I tested the P65+ on an H2 in Atlanta last week. Now THAT is an awesome viewfinder -- the large H image, coupled with no cropping. And the H2 shoots the P65+ very very fast, in full rez mode.
-
Hi,
That's just 4 MP. If you downsample a 40 MP sensor to 4 MP you would get about the same DR. The Kodak sensor has a lot of read noise, BTW, around 20 electrons that would reduce DR to around 25000:1.
So, you would be better of with a smaller pitch sensor in almost all cases. If you need a 50mm x 50mm square sensor, it's a different case, but how much are you willing to pay for that?
Just to explain how it works:
The Kodak sensor has few but large pixels, so each pixel can hold about 500000 electrons. A 40 MP digital back may hold about 60000 electrons in each pixel. If we downsample the 40 MP sensor to 4 MP we get about 600000 electrons per (downsampled) pixel. In practice DR is limited by shot noise (random variation of photons falling on sensor pixels) and that variation would be the same weather 4 MP (downsampled) or 4 MP (real).
Best regards
Erik
Yeah but don't get hung up on the theoretical DR from specs. The DR that matters to working photographers is measured differently. It always comes up with the armchair arguments for MFDB vs DSLR and its just pointless to go down that path. The biggest problem with that kodak sensor is not that its 4mp, but rather that its just a sensor. We'd need some of that phase or imacon voodoo and downstream electronics to make it useful - well that and its only monochrome.
-
Yeah but don't get hung up on the theoretical DR from specs. The DR that matters to working photographers is measured differently. It always comes up with the armchair arguments for MFDB vs DSLR and its just pointless to go down that path. The biggest problem with that kodak sensor is not that its 4mp, but rather that its just a sensor. We'd need some of that phase or imacon voodoo and downstream electronics to make it useful - well that and its only monochrome.
If you want to see the *practical* DR difference, just pick up a Canon and a Leica M8 or M9, shoot at low ISO and look at the way the Leica marks the textures. Although I must say that one cannot complain about the 5D2.
With a Phase back, you can shoot a model in direct sun, and bring back the shadows in post. If the Raw software you are using is decent there will be no hue shifts while opening the shadows. Hint: the most popular prosumer Raw converter is not necessarily the one you really really want to use after spending all that money, the guys who made the back may be making decent software for it too.
Edmund
-
If you want to see the DR difference, just pick up a Canon and a Leica M8 or M9 and look at the way the Leica sees into the shadows and marks the textures.
With a Phase back, you can shoot a model in direct sun, and bring back the shadows in post. If the Raw software you are using is decent there will be no hue shifts while opening the shadows. Hint: the most popular prosumer Raw converter is not necessarily the one you really really want to use after spending all that money, the guys who made the back may be making decent software for it too.
Edmund
Agree 100% Edmund
Cheers.
-
Eric,
The point I want to make is that there is no real advantage to a large pitch sensor over a small pitch sensor. Would that be the case the, Phase One couldn't charge 30 kUSD (or so) for the P65+. Actually, if you use the technical definition of DR (at SNR equal 1) there may be an advantage with large pixels, but normally it's more "shot noise" which limits the acceptable noise levels in the darks. So in theory it's sensor size that matters and not pixel size.
A disturbing fact is that it is very hard to find a single comparison of MFDBs and DSLRs using adequate methods. With adequate methods I mean:
1) Reproducible setup
2) Correct exposure to the right (so full well capacity is actually utilized)
3) RAW ord DNG images (so they could be analyzed by RawAnalyzer or other tools)
Such an experiment would be very easy to conclude for anyone having both kinds of equipment, but I have actually not seen any.
Also, it seems that there is an obsession with DR in these discussion. DR is not particularly easy to measure. There are other parameters that may be much more important.
1) Sharpness obviously, no one really doubts that there is a sharpness advantage of larger sensors
2) Color handling, this is much dependent on the Color Grid Array in front of the sensor but also on algorithms
3) Internal reflections, number of air/glass surfaces, baffling
The point I really wanted to make that making a 2500 squre mm sensor with four gargantuan size megapixels would not produce better DR (in print) than a similar sized sensor with ten times as many smaller pixels as photon counts would be the same.
Finally, even a "cheap" MF equipment is a major investment. So I'd imagine that it is important that potential buyers are well informed, armchair arguments or not. I'd also suggest that anyone considering an investment in an MF system should consider arranging an equipment for test/loan/rental before shelling out their money.
Best regards
Erik
Yeah but don't get hung up on the theoretical DR from specs. The DR that matters to working photographers is measured differently. It always comes up with the armchair arguments for MFDB vs DSLR and its just pointless to go down that path. The biggest problem with that kodak sensor is not that its 4mp, but rather that its just a sensor. We'd need some of that phase or imacon voodoo and downstream electronics to make it useful - well that and its only monochrome.
-
Also, it seems that there is an obsession with DR in these discussion. DR is not particularly easy to measure. There are other parameters that may be much more important.
As always Erik, as always...
Still remember the famous thread about the DR Heresy...
Are you preocupated by DR ? Fine.
I'm preocupated by the viewfinder and if the controls are well implemented.
The only guests that are missing so far to complete this thread fest are the DxO plague and the PHD astro physics and quantic mechanics apply to photography.
IMHO.
-
If you want to see the *practical* DR difference, just pick up a Canon and a Leica M8 or M9, shoot at low ISO and look at the way the Leica marks the textures. Although I must say that one cannot complain about the 5D2.
With a Phase back, you can shoot a model in direct sun, and bring back the shadows in post. If the Raw software you are using is decent there will be no hue shifts while opening the shadows. Hint: the most popular prosumer Raw converter is not necessarily the one you really really want to use after spending all that money, the guys who made the back may be making decent software for it too.
Edmund
The 5Dii has the least usable DR at low ISO of any fullframe out there right now. Try bringing the shadows up a few stops, and it can be a banding mess in there. The A900 also has issues (although not nearly as bad as the 5Dii) with color shift in shadows below ISO 320 when trying to raise shadows a few stops. The D3x is certainly the current 35mm champ for extracting shadow details.
Using uniWB and a magenta filter also goes a long way in improving your camera's DR.
-
Sorry,
I'm more preoccupied finding out what is feasible and what is not.
It's a bid odd. DxO makes some real research and it's called DxO plague. Regarding the issue on PhDs I would just say that without the engineering stuff we would have a nice cosy echo-logical world with horses and no cars, electric light, cameras, TV and so on. Living without DxO plague, but having the real plague, wouldn't that be nice?!
It is certainly true, world can be without science, understanding, physics and math. But, science, understanding, physics and math are the factors that makes six or seven billion people survive on this planet.
Now, science is not absolute truth, we all now that. Once we thought that earth was flat, that was good science in that time. When we got telescopes we could see that the flat earth model couldn't explain some issues and started to realize that earth was round. Our understanding of the world around us changes, tomorrow's theories will expand those theories we have today. But, without theories and understanding we would be like blind men in a dark cave!
My view is that we need to understand how our tools work. That understanding can help us to make the best investment in technology. Let's take one of those car analogies: we all know that Ferrari (or was it Roll's Roice?) that makes the best cars. But if you are in real hurry it's hard to beat a Learjet. A Bugatti Veiron may be even faster. On the other hand, if you travel with cameras, tripods, flashes and a couple models a Toyota may get you from point A to point B in the most efficient way.
In my view everyone is entitled to having his or her idea, but that's absolutely no good reason to show disrespect to work that others do. DxO presents their measurements to the community, no one else does that! Im my view DxO does deserve some credit for doing that. DxO also makes a raw converter, possibly not the greatest one, I don't know, but they certainly do know about raw conversion.
Michael Reichmann says that it is his finding that his experience is not conformant with DxO test. That's fine, I have acceptance for that. But calling serious work "plague" just because you don't agree, isn't that going a bit far?!
I really have an issue with this, some folks do some serious testing. Their results are not what readers expect, so they get all the blame. DxO came up with a figure of merit called the DxO-mark. I find it a bit stupid, because tools are used different ways. Talking for myself, I'm seldom using high ISO. High ISO is certainly a merit but not a very important one for me. But, if you study the DxO results with some care you are going to see they are relevant. Unfortunately it is very hard to correlate the DxO measurements to other data, simply because there are no other data available, but that is hardly DxO-s fault, is it.
Our friend "bcooter" on this forums explains this very well. Customers doesn't care about equipment, the results count and the Canon DSLRs he uses fill the bill, most of the time. He shoots Leica M9 for leisure and loves his Contax with MFDB. I also got the impression that he would not invest in a P65 until he is able to calculate a reasonable return on investment. Mr Reichmann is in a different seat, he wants optimum quality and went from P45 to P65.
An observation. According to DxO-mark the P65+ is considerably better than the Nikon D3X, even ignoring the resolution advantage. Also the Nikon D3x is significantly better than the Sony Alpha 900 and the Canon 5DII. At least in these cases the DxO figures seem to make sense.
An interesting observation that Erwin Puts seems to make is that the Leica S2 has a better image quality than the Nikon D3X which in turn is better than the Hasselblad H39. I guess that the interpretation of image quality is always a bit a question of viewing point and I don't always really understand how to interpret Mr. Puts's tests, but I still find his conclusion interesting.
Best regards
Erik
As always Erik, as always...
Still remember the famous thread about the DR Heresy...
Are you preocupated by DR ? Fine.
I'm preocupated by the viewfinder and if the controls are well implemented.
The only think that are missing so far to complete this thread "as it should be" are the DxO plague and the PHD astro physics and quantic mechanics apply to photography.
IMHO.
-
It's a bid odd. DxO makes some real research and it's called DxO plague. Regarding the issue on PhDs I would just say that without the engineering stuff we would have a nice cosy echo-logical world with horses and no cars, electric light, cameras, TV and so on. Living without DxO plague, but having the real plague, wouldn't that be nice?!
Michael Reichmann says that it is his finding that his experience is not conformant with DxO test. That's fine, I have acceptance for that. But calling serious work "plague" just because you don't agree, isn't that going a bit far?!
I really have an issue with this, some folks do some serious testing. Their results are not what readers expect, so they get all the blame. DxO came up with a figure of merit called the DxO-mark. I find it a bit stupid, because tools are used different ways. Talking for myself, I'm seldom using high ISO. High ISO is certainly a merit but not a very important one for me. But, if you study the DxO results with some care you are going to see they are relevant. Unfortunately it is very hard to correlate the DxO measurements to other data, simply because there are no other data available, but that is hardly DxO-s fault, is it.
Our friend "bcooter" on this forums explains this very well. Customers doesn't care about equipment, the results count and the Canon DSLRs he uses fill the bill, most of the time. He shoots Leica M9 for leisure and loves his Contax with MFDB. I also got the impression that he would not invest in a P65 until he is able to calculate a reasonable return on investment. Mr Reichmann is in a different seat, he wants optimum quality and went from P45 to P65.
An observation. According to DxO-mark the P65+ is considerably better than the Nikon D3X, even ignoring the resolution advantage. Also the Nikon D3x is significantly better than the Sony Alpha 900 and the Canon 5DII. At least in these cases the DxO figures seem to make sense.
An interesting observation that Erwin Puts seems to make is that the Leica S2 has a better image quality than the Nikon D3X which in turn is better than the Hasselblad H39. I guess that the interpretation of image quality is always a bit a question of viewing point and I don't always really understand how to interpret Mr. Puts's tests, but I still find his conclusion interesting.
Best regards
Erik
Erik,
I have great respect for science. I love tech even if I do not understand maths equations.
In a F1 team, there is a lot of technology involved. But the mechanic is not the pilot neither the engineer. They are too busy with mastering their task.
DoX do some testings because that is what they are good at, but I do not call that photography, I call that datas compilation.
If you think that these numbers may help you, I'm fine with that and I respect each one's choice. But I'm also staying away from that.
I used the world plague not for DxO in itself, they want to do some mesurements? Great, fine, perfect. The plague is the abuse that is made from these mesurements, as arguments. Do I show disrespect for them? total lack of interest and confidence with these proceedings. But one thing is the number, other thing is the reality. This is not exact science or maths. This is an experiment, even serious, on mesurements. That point seems to not be understood so far despite the hundreds of postings about that fact from precisely the people you mentionned.
Trust your eyes. That is all I have to say. Trust what you see, and what the field experience tells you, regardless of the DRs and Co.
In ultimate instance, the DxO have zero interest if not to give us an aproximative idea of some tech parameters.
Trust the human brain and sensitivity. That is why photography is art and not just tech. It is above all that numbers.
It is vision and experience.
I agree 500% of what Michael, Guy Mancuso, Jack Flesher and others have been saying over and over again. So I agree with BC (1).
DR is nothing. Numbers are nothing (except the one when you write the checks). Your vision is all. IMHO.
(1) You pointed BC, but it is strange because B.Cooter is precisely very pragmatic in all his posts. He is talking about skin tones and rendering in fashion=what he sees. Or he points technical issues that are always from the field. I think I never read a BC post about numbers, DxO, or even DR if not from field experience, and that is exactly for all these reasons that I trust him, or that I think his voice is a source of real knowledge. I don't see a tech, although I am aware he knows pretty well all the technical aspects, but I do see an artist. But has he said: "keep in mind that in a forum all the voices have the same weight...
-
Hi Eric,
Thanks for your fast response. To clarify the issue I would like to believe my eyes but I don't have the means of testing a lot of different equipment. I guess that I also would need to print larger than I normally do to see meaningful differences. To me it seems that the "scientists"on this forum, like ejmartin, naetress, panopeeper and gluik and others actually find the DxO data informative. the other issue I really have is that there is a lot of talk but actually very little proof. It seems that people with humble equipment publish quite a lot of measurement data (I have myself supplied about 100 exposures to "panopeeper" so he could evaluate the sensor of the A900.)
On the other hand it seem tom me that folks having more exclusive equipment don't seem to make the effort to share some data. Any MFDB represents a significant investment, especially if you take all you need into consideration. I'd suggest that it would be nice if we could download a few representative images from different cameras and print using our own workflow to make an opinion, but there is actually very little to compare.
An exception was really the great 2006 MFDB shoot out here at LuLa. They even had the brilliant idea to use a 1 dollar bill as resolution test sample and had different MFDBs and using different apertures. I loved it!
The one dollar bill essentially mean that you can reproduce the test yourself, I have done that and found the advantage regarding resolution on the P45 very significant over my Alpha 900. I also found that stopping down the P45 equipment to f/22 (from f/8) essentially eliminated the advantage. Unfortunately, photographing a dollar bill tells a lot about sharpness but little about anything else. (These findings were based on interpretation of prints, so they were only presented verbally, as prints are hard to publish in electronic form.)
Here is my image of the dollar bill: http://echophoto.dnsalias.net/ekr/images/S...00_LLMFDBSO.dng (http://echophoto.dnsalias.net/ekr/images/SampleImages/SonyA900_LLMFDBSO.dng)
And here is a comparison of Velvia on Pentax 67 with Sony Alpha 900: http://echophoto.dnsalias.net/ekr/index.ph...date_2009_11_08 (http://echophoto.dnsalias.net/ekr/index.php/photoarticles/16-pentax67velvia-vs-sony-alpha-900#Update_2009_11_08)
Regarding "bcooter", who I actually presume to be James Russel, I'd suggest that he is very pragmatic, and this is actually what I say.
The starting point for this discussion was a post of admiration for a 4 MP sensor with a theoretical DR of 15 stops, and I pointed out that any sensor of similar size would have a similar DR when the image was reduced to the same number of pixels. That has to do with photon statistics. DxO happens to have a very good article on the issue. Now, there is an opinion on these forums that large pixels are to prefer compared to small pixels, but this is not really true. Small pixels would yield the same image quality in most cases as large pixels with a benefit in resolution, less issues with moiré and aliasing artifacts and so on. The only disadvantage with smaller pixels is that files are growing larger if sensor surface is the same.
The reason that James Russel did not jump on the "P65+" is that he doesn't feel that he get gets the return on investment that would be needed. Customers don't pay for unneeded megapixels. He also says that his Canons do 90% of the work and he shoots Leica for private leisure. That's a pragmatic approach. Michael Reichmann feels that there is a significant advantage to his P65+ images compared to his 24.6 MP DSLR images, so he does much of his work with the P65+. In my view that is also a pragmatic approach.
Still I ask my self. Let's assume that a guy wants the ultimate equipment and shells out like 40 kUSD. What benefit will he get? Will he get magic benefits like 5-6 stops advantage in DR? Physically that would be hard to explain. Obviously he can get resolution advantages, but it may take some hard work to achieve it. Now, what benefits will he gain if he invests 10 kUSD in some used stuff. If he or she doesn't get the ROI expected he/she is standing with the expense. Talking is cheap, listening can be expensive. Good samples are gold but seldom found.
Best regards
Erik
Best regards
Erik Kaffehr
Erik,
I have great respect for science. I love tech even if I do not understand maths equations.
In a F1 team, there is a lot of technology involved. But the mechanic is not the pilot neither the engineer. They are too busy with mastering their task.
DoX do some testings because that is what they are good at, but I do not call that photography, I call that datas compilation.
If you think that these numbers may help you, I'm fine with that and I respect each one's choice.
But, trust your eyes. That is all I have to say. Trust what you see, and what the field experience tells you, regardless of the DRs and Co.
In ultimate instance, the DxO have zero interest if not to give us an aproximative idea of some tech parameters.
Trust the human brain and sensitivity. That is why photography is art and not just tech. It is above all that numbers.
It is vision and experience.
I agree 500% of what Michael, Guy Mancuso, Jack Flesher and others have been saying over and over again. So I agree with BC.
DR is nothing. Numbers are nothing (except the one when you write the checks). Your vision is all. IMHO.
-
Hi Eric,
Thanks for your fast response. To clarify the issue I would like to believe my eyes but I don't have the means of testing a lot of different equipment. I guess that I also would need to print larger than I normally do to see meaningful differences. To me it seems that the "scientists"on this forum, like ejmartin, naetress, panopeeper and gluik and others actually find the DxO data informative. the other issue I really have is that there is a lot of talk but actually very little proof. It seems that people with humble equipment publish quite a lot of measurement data (I have myself supplied about 100 exposures to "panopeeper" so he could evaluate the sensor of the A900.)
On the other hand it seem tom me that folks having more exclusive equipment don't seem to make the effort to share some data. Any MFDB represents a significant investment, especially if you take all you need into consideration. I'd suggest that it would be nice if we could download a few representative images from different cameras and print using our own workflow to make an opinion, but there is actually very little to compare.
An exception was really the great 2006 MFDB shoot out here at LuLa. They even had the brilliant idea to use a 1 dollar bill as resolution test sample and had different MFDBs and using different apertures. I loved it!
The one dollar bill essentially mean that you can reproduce the test yourself, I have done that and found the advantage regarding resolution on the P45 very significant over my Alpha 900. I also found that stopping down the P45 equipment to f/22 (from f/8) essentially eliminated the advantage. Unfortunately, photographing a dollar bill tells a lot about sharpness but little about anything else. (These findings were based on interpretation of prints, so they were only presented verbally, as prints are hard to publish in electronic form.)
Here is my image of the dollar bill: http://echophoto.dnsalias.net/ekr/images/S...00_LLMFDBSO.dng (http://echophoto.dnsalias.net/ekr/images/SampleImages/SonyA900_LLMFDBSO.dng)
And here is a comparison of Velvia on Pentax 67 with Sony Alpha 900: http://echophoto.dnsalias.net/ekr/index.ph...date_2009_11_08 (http://echophoto.dnsalias.net/ekr/index.php/photoarticles/16-pentax67velvia-vs-sony-alpha-900#Update_2009_11_08)
Best regards
Erik Kaffehr
I remember that article. That was a great contribution.
It helped to have a pretty good idea.
But then, the results can be completly different according to the subject, type of printings etc...and what can work for you in a special configuration, would not work as well in another one, and this, independently of what the strict testings are showing.
In fact, if you are a fashion photographer, you have to do the testings in your area in real configuration. Because if not you can find big surprises.
I think Gwift (if I remember well) pointed before in this thread about that Pentax that he liked the 800 iso files, so did I, more than the lower isos in this case. A landscaper would probaly hate these 800 isos. It just depends on so many factors.
Cheers.
-
Regarding "bcooter", who I actually presume to be James Russel, I'd suggest that he is very pragmatic, and this is actually what I say.
My impression, just reading the posts style, they are different.
Is that B.Cooter is the Dr Jekyll, and James Russel is the Mister Hide... of the same person so it is logical that he has doubled his membership.
But it is my strictly personal speculation.
-
My impression, just reading the posts style, they are different.
Is that B.Cooter is the Dr Jekyll, and James Russel is the Mister Hide... of the same person so it is logical that he has doubled his membership.
But it is my strictly personal speculation.
There used to be a very clever character called James,
who could masterfully grasp both sides of every question.
James was stressed and a bit contentious.
One day James flew apart,
And his fragments
Now represent each its side,
Courteously.
And all the king's horses,
And all the king's men,
cannot put the RG forum together again
Edmund
-
A disturbing fact is that it is very hard to find a single comparison of MFDBs and DSLRs using adequate methods. With adequate methods I mean:
I'll bet you that almost every working pro has and/or uses both MFDB and a DSLR and can tell you in which shooting/lighting conditions that they'd prefer to use one or the other. A lot of serious amateurs have both cameras too. If its such a big deal for you to find out then you should bring a couple memory cards and test charts down to your local store and shoot some images. I don't think it would cost you anything except your time.
-
There used to be a very clever character called James,
who could masterfully grasp both sides of every question.
James was stressed and a bit contentious.
One day James flew apart,
And his fragments
Now represent each its side,
Courteously.
And all the king's horses,
And all the king's men,
cannot put the RG forum together again
Edmund
Hah! You're not jesting.
Hah!
-
645D with pictures review. Japanese only (no I don't understand it either but the pix look good)
http://dc.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/review/...604_371978.html (http://dc.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/review/newproduct/20100604_371978.html)