Pentax 645Z

[JV]

JV, I thought the same thing, but they have a 35mm F3.5 listed lower down, no picture yet, price is $1500.00 which is more, quite a bit more than the 35mm FA sold for when it was available in the U.S.  Mine was 989.00. 

Here is the link:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1045498-REG/pentax_26917_35mm_f_3_5_smcp_fa_645.html

Thanks for pointing that out!  It is listed as a new item, available for pre-order, perhaps a new version of the lens?

All in all a very impressive offer from Pentax!  Finally a realistically priced MFD system and food for thought for Phase, Hasselblad and Leica.

Now we just also need Sony and Fuji to show up at the party as well and hopefully some companies will start revising their unmaintainable business model.

[KevinA]

I would think the secondhand value of Phaseone and Hasselblad has just been blitzed to scrap value in comparison to what was paid. No doubt if you have a couple of years to run on a lease or HP you are now in serious negative equity. There might be a niche business reason for buying a secondhand P65 over the Z, I doubt that will apply to many. Digital has saved us photographers so much money right?

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,

All those reasons also applied to the Pentax 645D, and I guess Pentax sold quite a lot of them.

What I ask is if the 645Z is a major redesign of the 645 to fit the small sensor or if it is the original 645 with a Sony sensor.

The 645D was one of those cameras I considered from time to time.

Another point may be that we will probably see 50+MP CMOS on full frame 135 pretty soon, I guess. With great lens options like Zeiss Otus, Sigma Art and some other lenses 135 digital may move into the same territory as 50 MP MF.

As a final thought, I am pretty sure the 645Z will shine in DxO-mark, the 68% larger sensor surface should add 8-10 points, I guess 105-110 on the DxO scale.

Best regards
Erik

It is just so Pentastish (forgive), i.e. it fits the old P645 concept so well.  The P645 never gained the traction it deserved due to dogmatic reservations about the non-interchangable back.  Perhaps this time Ricoh/Pentax have another chance with

- relatively low price
- robustness and weather sealing
- availability of outstanding lenses in all price ranges.  Used FA and A lenses, new FA lenses, and the most recent DA and D FA lenses
- optional adaptation of even more lenses
- basic movie capability

This time is looks like it'll add top of the line sensor quality.  It's the medium format camera for the sophisticated amateur once more priced between full-frame and the other players.  I find it the first overwhelmingly convincing Pentax offering in a decade, especially with the renewed availability of FA lenses.  I wish them the success they deserve.  Looks like they have put a lot of thought and effort into it. 

[Theodoros]

All in all a very impressive offer from Pentax!  Finally a realistically priced MFD system and food for thought for Phase, Hasselblad and Leica.

Now we just also need Sony and Fuji to show up at the party as well and hopefully some companies will start revising their unmaintainable business model.

There can't be another MF maker in the game for a while... not unless the market proves that it worths the investment... The sales figures are too low to support another entry... Additionally, if Fuji would care to enter that market, they would do so with their own sensor. I also doubt a new entry that would need from the maker to design and build a completely new range of lenses. MO is, that Pentax would have never make the move if they didn't have the old base of customers from the film days to support them. What may happen, is that if the "Z" pushes prices down considerably (which is very possible), it may cause the MF market to grow further and it may -as a consequence- cause the "resurrection" of camera makers that where forced to stop production (like Contax or Rollei) although their systems are "digital ready". However, I suspect that such a "resurrection" can't occur under the previous status of these companies, but rather if they are integrated with other active companies in the MF market... Leica for instance does need a modular system to "bridge" the "S" system with Sinar (a system that would provide an MF platform for Sinarbacks and that would have fully compatible lenses with the "S" via an adapter like it happens with C645 and may also happen with Rollei if they proceed to make the Rollei to "S" adapter). 

Never the less, I believe that the market positioning of the shortly coming Mamyia/Leaf Credo back with the same Sony Cmos sensor, will play a vast role on the future of the MF market... If they decide pricing it following the same policy as it was up today, I'm afraid that the MF market can't expand considerably, if they decide (risk?) towards higher production - lower profit, the MF market may expand considerably... Sinar/Leica's move may also be of major importance... I don't think that Sinar will only proceed to offer a CMOS version of their "S" (with other than Sony sensor), but it is likely that they will also have a Sinarback based on the same technology in parallel production to the CMOS Leica-S.

[Theodoros]

Hi,

All those reasons also applied to the Pentax 645D, and I guess Pentax sold quite a lot of them.

What I ask is if the 645Z is a major redesign of the 645 to fit the small sensor or if it is the original 645 with a Sony sensor.

The 645D was one of those cameras I considered from time to time.

Another point may be that we will probably see 50+MP CMOS on full frame 135 pretty soon, I guess. With great lens options like Zeiss Otus, Sigma Art and some other lenses 135 digital may move into the same territory as 50 MP MF.

As a final thought, I am pretty sure the 645Z will shine in DxO-mark, the 68% larger sensor surface should add 8-10 points, I guess 105-110 on the DxO scale.

Best regards
Erik

All recent lenses for the Pentax system, have an image circle able to cover the whole 56x42mm area of 6x4.5 film... mount to light sensitive area distance is also the same. Pentax can have a "FF" version of the 645 if they decide to do so...

[lelouarn]

I think the Sony 50 Mpix sensor fits into a much larger scheme than a niche market. If you look at the camera industry in general, selling megapixels is not anymore the right message : there are camera-phones with 20-40 Mpix sensors. And everybody can see that they are not the same quality as DSLRs with 20-40 Mpix sensors. So what's the difference ? The sensor size !

So in the future, we will see camera makers differentiate themselves from their competitors (be it camera phones, compacts,...) by emphasizing sensor size instead of Mpix count. Bigger is better !

So you have a camera phone ? To increase image quality, you need a bigger sensor ! Get a large sensor compact (like the Sony RX-100). You have a Sony RX-100 but want better quality:  get a FF-DSLR, and yes, Sony has one ! You have a FF-DSLF ? You want better quality ? Get an MF-sensor !

I believe this general marketing scheme will boost MF sales. I also don't think Sony is in the business of filling small market niches. It's a consumer electronics company. So I really think they see a big potential in MF, because it fits into the new general camera sales pitch: forget Mpix, bigger sensors is what you want / need / must have.

Of course, I could be completely wrong  

[leeonmaui]

Aloha,

I think the 35 listed at b&h must be;
typo as they are releasing a 33-55 "D" version

Or they are getting some new stock in the old 35mm in!

I know they will be releasing a monster wide zoom soon.
My friend saw one at a show and said it was giant, bigger than the camera, maybe something in the 24-70 range....

[Paul2660]

Wasn't the 645D a 1:1 crop, like the P45+?  Even 1:1 can make a difference.  I never installed the masks in my DF for the 1:1 and thus quite a few times unintentionally cropped out a critical part of my shot. 

The 645Z will be 1:3 just like the IQ250, so I will assume that Pentax has installed either a mask or some other method of showing the real view.  As T stated earlier all the the FA lenses would work fine on a 1:0 sensor.

Paul

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,

645D was 1.3X crop.

The Pentax is built around the sensor so there is no need for viewfinder mask.

Best regards
Erik

Wasn't the 645D a 1:1 crop, like the P45+?  Even 1:1 can make a difference.  I never installed the masks in my DF for the 1:1 and thus quite a few times unintentionally cropped out a critical part of my shot. 

The 645Z will be 1:3 just like the IQ250, so I will assume that Pentax has installed either a mask or some other method of showing the real view.  As T stated earlier all the the FA lenses would work fine on a 1:0 sensor.

Paul

[ACH DIGITAL]

Just speculating and a bit out of topic, I imaging Sony designing a medium format sort of like the 7Ar, but a bit larger and with the 50megapixel sensor and a new set of lenses. No mirror, shorter flange and amazing quality.. 

[Paul2660]

Hi,

645D was 1.3X crop.

The Pentax is built around the sensor so there is no need for viewfinder mask.

Best regards
Erik

Eric thanks for the clarification, but even built around the sensor, a 35mm lens on the 645Z would be an effective 45mm?

It's just the viewfinder is built to the 1.3 crop already so you still see everything the sensor is seeing?

Thanks
Paul

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,

Yes, a 35 mm lens would be like 45mm on 1.0 crop.

I have no P645D, so I cannot say about the viewfinder, but as you cannot put another sensor on the camera it makes perfectly good sense to add a viewfinder mask in production and use a smaller prism which will save some weight.

Best regards
Erik

Eric thanks for the clarification, but even built around the sensor, a 35mm lens on the 645Z would be an effective 45mm?

It's just the viewfinder is built to the 1.3 crop already so you still see everything the sensor is seeing?

Thanks
Paul

[Theodoros]

Hi,

645D was 1.3X crop.

The Pentax is built around the sensor so there is no need for viewfinder mask.

Best regards
Erik

The Pentax body is build around a FF 56x42mm image area as film area was... It's the finder that is "adjusted" along the sensor, not the body.

[Theodoros]

Eric thanks for the clarification, but even built around the sensor, a 35mm lens on the 645Z would be an effective 45mm?

It's just the viewfinder is built to the 1.3 crop already so you still see everything the sensor is seeing?

Thanks
Paul

The AOV that you effectively see, has to do with sensor size not with the sensor area that the lens was designed for... Therefore, for a 44mm sensor, the equivalent HORIZONTAL AOV with respect to 35mm FF is (aprox) 22% larger....  i.e., 36x1.22=44 (aprox) so, with a 35mm lens you see a (horizontal) AOV that equals one of 29mm equivalent in 35mm simply because, 29x1.22=35.38...

[Paul2660]

T.

I was referring to 35mm lens on a 645, so the if the 645z has a 44 x 33 sensor, basically a 1:3 crop.  So as I understand it, the Pentax 35mm 645 FA F3.5 Pentax lens would be in effect a 45mm view on the 645z or the IQ250 or the Hassi when it's out.   

Isn't that correct?

Thanks
Paul

[Theodoros]

Eric thanks for the clarification, but even built around the sensor, a 35mm lens on the 645Z would be an effective 45mm?

It's just the viewfinder is built to the 1.3 crop already so you still see everything the sensor is seeing?

Thanks
Paul

The AOV that you effectively see, has to do with sensor size not with the sensor area that the lens was designed for... Therefore, for a 44mm sensor, the equivalent HORIZONTAL AOV with respect to 35mm FF is (aprox) 22% larger....  i.e., 36x1.22=44 (aprox) so, with a 35mm lens you see a (horizontal) AOV that equals one of 29mm equivalent in 35mm simply because, 29x1.22=35.38...

EDIT: If you calculate the same for a 54mm sensor, you'll find that 35mm lens in 44mm sensor equals 42.7mm lens AOV on a 54mm width sensor.

[david distefano]

I would think the secondhand value of Phaseone and Hasselblad has just been blitzed to scrap value in comparison to what was paid. No doubt if you have a couple of years to run on a lease or HP you are now in serious negative equity. There might be a niche business reason for buying a secondhand P65 over the Z, I doubt that will apply to many. Digital has saved us photographers so much money right?

i agree. seeing the prices on ebay and the 2 major dealers for 2nd hand backs, i believe that you are looking at, in the post pentax 645z mfdb market, at least a 40 to 50 percent reduction in price for p45/p45+ on down. the ability to use on view cameras for most photographers does not justify today's 2nd hand market prices.

[geesbert]

waist level viewfinder"

live view with a flippable screen is a waist level finder to me....though only in landscape orientation.

[uaiomex]

Just for clarification. I understand all Pentax 645 lenses being manufactured today cover the 42X56mm area. Right?

If this is true, doesn't this hint that a full-frame 645 body will come sooner or later?

Eduardo

Hi,

645D was 1.3X crop.

The Pentax is built around the sensor so there is no need for viewfinder mask.

Best regards
Erik

[uaiomex]

I'm a lover of fully articulated screens in every format but my phone  . I was truly disappointed about the one-axis articulated screen in the Z.
As DPR pointed out, it is strange that Pentax didn't include one considering that they provide this camera a second tripod connection for convenient portrait shooting.
As I always have said, all camera designers are a little schizo.
Eduardo

live view with a flippable screen is a waist level finder to me....though only in landscape orientation.