645D vs D3x

[mhecker*]

True, nothing is perfect and that's why Live View is a must. All auto functions are far from perfect. Camera construction tolerances are in most cases too laxed for exact accurate focusing. So, the only feature provided this year for deadly accurate focus is Live View.
Eduardo

I'm going to chime in here.

I've used my 645D for a month now.
At the f-stops I shoot between f8 and f11, at distances from 2 feet to infinity, low light to sunlight, the 645D has nailed every single shot.
It has been as accurate at focus as live view on my 5Dmk2 or borrowed D3x, every time.
If I shot at f2.8 things might be different.

Maybe the massively solid body and AF just works with my 10 year old glass or maybe I'm damn lucky.
The finder is also for me at least, good enough to nail MF 95% of the time.
I am lucky enough to still have better than 20/15 vision with my glasses on at least.    

IMO I don't miss live view a bit...  

YMMV

[eronald]

Let me guess, you don't believe in Fate, you believe in F8?

Edmund

I'm going to chime in here.

I've used my 645D for a month now.
At the f-stops I shoot between f8 and f11, at distances from 2 feet to infinity, low light to sunlight, the 645D has nailed every single shot.
It has been as accurate at focus as live view on my 5Dmk2 or borrowed D3x, every time.
If I shot at f2.8 things might be different.

Maybe the massively solid body and AF just works with my 10 year old glass or maybe I'm damn lucky.
The finder is also for me at least, good enough to nail MF 95% of the time.
I am lucky enough to still have better than 20/15 vision with my glasses on at least.    

IMO I don't miss live view a bit...  

YMMV

[ErikKaffehr]

Miles,

So, what's your take?

Best regards
Erik

I'm going to chime in here.

I've used my 645D for a month now.
At the f-stops I shoot between f8 and f11, at distances from 2 feet to infinity, low light to sunlight, the 645D has nailed every single shot.
It has been as accurate at focus as live view on my 5Dmk2 or borrowed D3x, every time.
If I shot at f2.8 things might be different.

Maybe the massively solid body and AF just works with my 10 year old glass or maybe I'm damn lucky.
The finder is also for me at least, good enough to nail MF 95% of the time.
I am lucky enough to still have better than 20/15 vision with my glasses on at least.    

IMO I don't miss live view a bit...  

YMMV

[tsjanik]

I concur with Miles.  I’ve had the 645D since mid-December and have little difficulty achieving focus (also at f/8 to f/11).  I miss sometimes with MF lenses when wide open at f/2.8 or f/4 but I rarely shoot at those apertures; the AF, on the other hand, is very reliable.  Most of my tests have been on real world subjects, but I did an impromptu test using a ruler next to a pile of laundry.  A typical example below used the 120mm FA at f/4.  Focus was the 6.
Diglloyd has reported focus difficulty, but I haven’t had the same experience.  A real advantage of live view is the absence of two optical paths to the finder and the sensor; Pentax has done a heck of job ensuring that those two paths are the same in the 645D, at least the one I have.  The clothes are clean by the way.

[Ray]

Can I suggest that autofocus accuracy may not just be dependent upon the accurate quality control and calibration of the camera body, but the behaviour of specific models of lenses attached to the camera.

A camera may have precise autofocus with one particular lens, but not with another.

I get the impression that part of the attraction of the 645D is the fact that many legacy Pentax lenses, including some 6x7 format lenses can be used with this camera. I doubt that all of them will be capable of accurate autofocussing, and some will probably not autofocus at all.

The lack of a LiveView facility does seem a disadvantage to me, especially considering the tendency to always use these heavier, larger formats on a tripod, which is almost a precondition for using LiveView for accurate focussing.

In other words, if I don't use LiveView frequently myself, with my DSLRs that have it, it's because I don't frequently use a tripod. If I did use a tripod most of the time, I would certainly appreciate Live View. At 10x magnification the degree of detail is amazing. You can focus accurately on a single strand of hair.

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,

Diglloyd also had problems focusing the Leica S2 and he tested two samples. Mark Dubovoy says that camera has very exact AF both in theory and in his experience. Surprising. I also mostly use f/8 on my Sony Alpha 900, in part because I don't really trust AF, but also because lenses tend to perform optimally around f/8 and a bit depth of field is nice to have in my normal picture taking.

To me it seems that the Pentax is a very good camera with a reasonable price tag.

Best regards
Erik

I concur with Miles.  I’ve had the 645D since mid-December and have little difficulty achieving focus (also at f/8 to f/11).  I miss sometimes with MF lenses when wide open at f/2.8 or f/4 but I rarely shoot at those apertures; the AF, on the other hand, is very reliable.  Most of my tests have been on real world subjects, but I did an impromptu test using a ruler next to a pile of laundry.  A typical example below used the 120mm FA at f/4.  Focus was the 6.
Diglloyd has reported focus difficulty, but I haven’t had the same experience.  A real advantage of live view is the absence of two optical paths to the finder and the sensor; Pentax has done a heck of job ensuring that those two paths are the same in the 645D, at least the one I have.  The clothes are clean by the way.

[uaiomex]

I think Canon is doing a lousy job on getting the in-camera paths of light right on. I don't know Nikon. Maybe they relaxed quite some since live-view and micro-adjustments arrived, don't know. I believe that Pentax is doing a great job assembling the 645D and I applaud them for such feat, nevertheless live view focusing is perfection in the flesh.
Eduardo

[ErikKaffehr]

:-) My Faith is also in F8. :-)

BR
Erik

Let me guess, you don't believe in Fate, you believe in F8?

Edmund

[uaiomex]

And be there! 

:-) My Faith is also in F8. :-)

BR
Erik

[Josh-H]

Let me guess, you don't believe in Fate, you believe in F8?

Edmund

LOL - I hope you dont mind but I am going to use that quote one day 

[eronald]

LOL - I hope you dont mind but I am going to use that quote one day  

You're welcome. I didn't make it up, it's one of those memes that pops up periodically on the Internet, and probably was invented by some press photographer in the gooden olden manual focus days

Shows how little things change.


Edmund

[BernardLanguillier]

Let me guess, you don't believe in Fate, you believe in F8?

I must be spending too much time in front of my computer these days... I have been trying to understand for 2 days why the F8 key of my keyboard should be helping my photography!...

Cheers,
Bernard

[Eric Myrvaagnes]

Anyway, Fate and F8 are easier to pronounce than, say, Fsixtyfour and F64. 

If you were Ed Weston, you would definitely want an F64 key on your computer.

Eric

[djonesii]

F8 and be there Wee Gee

With a Speed Graphic 4X5 and a grafmatic back.

One of the first New York Street photographers!

Dave

[kuau]

Time to chime in,

Having owned a D3x, all three of the Nikon TS lenses, 24,45, and 85mm, plus the 14-24mm
Then selling my D3x system for a used Hasselblad H3D39 and buying used HCD lenses, 28, 50, 80, and 150mm
The reason I sold my D3x was I figured the Nikon needs to be shot like a MF camera, tripod, MLU, cable release etc, and the fact that I paid 6400 for the H3D39 plus I like 4:3 over 3:2
Then selling that system because when I moved to Park City Utah last summer and earlier this winter I took my H3D out in 15 degree weather, the H3D body came on, but the H3D39 back would not turn on,  I called Hasselblad and they told me that there backs are only rated to go down to 32 degrees. So.....
I sold my Hassy system and waited for the Pentax 645D to come out in the USA.
I finally purchased my USA 645d from Ace photo and also purchased a bunch of used 645 FA lenses and one "A" lens the 120mm macro.
I ended up with the 35mm FA, 45-85 FA, 75mm FA, 150mm FA and 300mm FA 5.6 lenses.
I tried the 645 45mm FA, garbage, I also tried the 67 45mm with adaptor no good either.

Here is my take so far, I just shot the 645D camera this past weekend in Yosemite.
The 35mm FA is good to me but for from great. Edges are not great. I shoot all of these lenses at f11-F13 all landscape, mostly at infinity or close to it.
The 45-85mm from 45-65mm is quite good sharp across the image area.
The 75mm FA no problems.
The 120mm A lens to me or I am sure the same with the FA version to me is there sharpest lens that pentad has for the 645D.
The 150mm is good not not as sharp as the 120mm
The 300mm same as the 150, sharp but not as sharp as the 120mm
Oh yeah all of the FA lenses I have needed Micro Focus adjustment.
Once I did that AF overall is very good.

The 645D body is built great, and rated to 0 degrees. Weather sealed etc.

My gripes are with lenses. I am not interested in a 25mm lens, to wide for my taste, I would have been happy with a updated 35mm FA, well in that case an update to all of there FA lenses.

So im on the fence now, Pentax will be very slow to introduce new lenses, all of the FA lenses are no longer being manufactured, all there is available is either old new stock or used.
This to me is a MAJOR issue for me. It's really to bad, Pentax has a great body in there 645D. There new 55mm SWD lens that shipped when the 645D came out according to Digilloys is not a good performer at infinity, yeah I know I can get the 55mm 67 lens, but unfortunately for me my vision is not very good 20/30 in my leafy eye and 20/45 in my right, thats as good as it gets for me, and since there is no split prism focusing screen, I am screwed with Manual focusing and as Digilloyd mentioned in his lengthy review on the 645D, Focus confirmation light is not accurate when using manual focus lens, and I did confirm this myself with my 120mm A lens.

Getting back to the D3x having owned one, the only TS lens that was sharp enough was the 85mm, the 24 and 45mm did not cut it. The 14-24 zoom worked well on the D3x,
I discovered what Digilloyd has been saying a along about the D3x, Zeiss mf lenses are the only way to go for the D3x, and yes when I had the D3x I had the AA filter removed from maxmax, not that big of a difference, I would NOT recommend this modification for the D3x, waste of money. I would have been better off sell my 24 and 45mm ts lenses for zees glass and perfect my capture sharpening, which brings me back to the 645D, I think the files need capture sharpening which to me tells me that the pentax lenses are just not quite "there"
Files off my H3d needed very little capture sharpening and as other posters have mentioned in this thread, to me my M9 in terms of overall sharpness can not be beat. Leica did an amazing job with this camera, I love using my M9, but I can only focus up to 75mm, I just could not focus the 90mm elmarit.

So as I go through my 645D files from this weekend I am scratching my head.... If only pentad would come out with a split prism focusing screen, for me I would be in heaven, I would go out and buy the 645 to Hasselblad adaptor and use zees glass mf.

Steven

[DandA]

Hi Steven,

Permit me to chime in here. I've been putting a 645D body through its paces recently with many of the same focal length FA lenses you have and your findings and observations are quite precise.  I won't post my results till I finish additional testing but one thing is for sure....the FA 120 macro (and I assume the MF version of the same lens) is head and shoulders above all other FA 645 lenses in terms of resolution across the entire frame at all distances and f-stops.  It's the lens which all other pentax 645 lenses should be measured by, in terms of performance and is a true indicator what the 645D body is capable of.  It's not to say some other FA lenses aren't good, they are, but nothing comes close to the the Pentax 120 f4 macro..especially that it can be used even wide open for exceptional results.  

Once stopped down somewhat, the little 75mm is also very good.  Some of the others are decent "to" good too...but have to be stopped down to at least f9 (beyond f8) or more to even come somehwat close to the 120 macro.  Again this is looking at 100% crops in anticipation to printing quite large.  The longer faster telephoto's (beyond 200mm) are very good too but don't expect Nikon 300 f2.8 VR acuity..its not quite the same thing. I too shoot Nikon and some of their long pro glass.  I believe down the road, little by little, Pentax will release more lenses (or update old ones)..but of course "at a price"...and they will no longer be the often seen bargins they currently are.  Once they have lenses that truly do justice to the 645D body, one can say they truly have a competitive system....at least if they keep prices in a range that give the competition a run for its money...which currently, when price is considered (at the moment), it does.

Dave (DandA)

[Frank Doorhof]

Try to test a phase one DF body with a leaf or phase back.
I've used my leaf in weather far below zero and high above 35 degrees and it never ever failed due to the weather.
Lenses has to be picked carefully of you're wanting top quality.
I love the schneider 80mm f2.8 LS and the Mamiya 105-210 AF,also the 75-150 is very nice.

I thinknthe system is very durable and the image quality will beat most put there.
I never tried the pentax to be be honest but I see no reason to do so at the moment, and that means a lot because I was always looking to improve the quality

[DandA]

Where there seems to be the greatest weakness and variability in the Pentax 645D system, especially for edge to edge shapness in landscape use is more so on the wider end of things.  It seems some of the other fine MFD systems out there also have some variablity in their performance on the wider end too.  In the mid telephoto range such as 100-150mm or so, the Pentax does alright (even spectaculary with the 120 f4 macro lens) and although some other systems, lens wise, might outperform it...thats not where the majority of improvement is needed (in my opinion). I guess its not much diffferent than the early days of full frame 35mm DSRL's...where on the wider end, performance often "lacked" (especially on the sides and corners), and needed the most attention.  It will get there for the 645D system, but will probably take both time and eventually a fair amount of $$.

Dave (DandA)

[kers]

In general more pixels and the lenses to feed them seems to be the whole story; and I guess for some photography it is.
For me what is important is not only that quality but also to do whatever comes in my head.
So I will be shooting 35mm now and in the future for it is the most flexible system ever made.
I can make prints of a meter wide that look very good even close. Can shoot in conditions that my eyes are less sensitive than my camera. Can use d1,4 and pinpoint my sharpness with pixel accuracy as the same way i can make photographs with my PCE-lenses at d2,8 tilted with complete control of the field of sharpness - attach special lenses like fisheye lenses and heavy tele lenses; use my interval timer, shoot 5 fps, use VR-lenses etc...
The billboards on the streets are about the only big outlets for photographs and are well feeded with only 12MP...

[Ray]

In general more pixels and the lenses to feed them seems to be the whole story; and I guess for some photography it is.
For me what is important is not only that quality but also to do whatever comes in my head.
So I will be shooting 35mm now and in the future for it is the most flexible system ever made.
I can make prints of a meter wide that look very good even close. Can shoot in conditions that my eyes are less sensitive than my camera. Can use d1,4 and pinpoint my sharpness with pixel accuracy as the same way i can make photographs with my PCE-lenses at d2,8 tilted with complete control of the field of sharpness - attach special lenses like fisheye lenses and heavy tele lenses; use my interval timer, shoot 5 fps, use VR-lenses etc...
The billboards on the streets are about the only big outlets for photographs and are well feeded with only 12MP...

Good points! It has always seemed to me, with my limited experience, that the MF format, whether film or digital, is a more cumbersome and less flexible system than 35mm.
To pay huge sums of money for a tool which is more awkward to use, is significantly heavier (with lenses), and requires the use of a tripod most of the time, doesn't make much sense to me when the results are only marginally better at print sizes that most of us make.

However, if I were in the business, or even if it were my hobby, of making prints from a 4ft wide printer (or wider), then these latest MFDBs, with sensors up to 80mp, might make some sense, if money were not an issue.

I recall from the days of MF film that the additional resolution and detail of the larger format was often not as significant as factors such as 'less obvious grain', smoother tonality and better DR.

Comparisons were uncomplicated because one could get the same film type for different formats, which would be equivalent to comparing different digital formats employing the same sensor design, which is not possible with most modern digital cameras, although the Canon 20D and 5D2 come pretty close in that respect.

I'm looking forward to the upgrade of the D700 employing D7000 pixels. I think I mentioned before, that would be a 40mp sensor. After a recalculation, I think that was a slight exaggeration. It would be closer to 36mp, but sufficient for my purposes at that degree of pixel quality.