Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6   Go Down

Author Topic: Diglloyd tests the P645Z  (Read 26664 times)

BernardLanguillier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 13980
    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/bernardlanguillier/sets/
Re: Diglloyd tests the P645Z
« Reply #80 on: July 13, 2014, 11:34:38 pm »

I received a mailing from a major Japanese photo equipment retailer over the weekend.

In that document they listed the Pentax 25mm f4 as being out of production.

Cheers,
Bernard

ErikKaffehr

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11311
    • Echophoto
Re: Diglloyd tests the P645Z
« Reply #81 on: July 14, 2014, 01:30:26 am »

Interesting... Why?

BR Erik


I received a mailing from a major Japanese photo equipment retailer over the weekend.

In that document they listed the Pentax 25mm f4 as being out of production.

Cheers,
Bernard
Logged
Erik Kaffehr
 

ErikKaffehr

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11311
    • Echophoto
Re: Diglloyd tests the P645Z (Update)
« Reply #82 on: July 14, 2014, 01:43:04 am »

Hi,

Michael doesn't shoot test targets.

The A7r definitively has shutter related vibrations. Jim Kasson has analysed it truly. Sorry, in this case you are in a fact denial mode.

The reason Michael doesn't see the shutter vibrations may be:

- The image is good enough, although degraded by vibrations. It should be at the 24 MP level
- He is shooting higher ISO so he avoids the 1/15 - 1/125 range
- He is shooting handheld, in which case body adds mass and shutter times tend to be short
- He doesn't print larger than A2, I would think A1 size may show some differences

But, as the issue can be measured, it is obviously there. That said, it needs two images of test charts or subjects with very fine detail viewed at actual pixels one image on top of the other to see the difference.

Now, you may say, why care if you cannot se it?  Good point. On the other hand, why pay for it if it isn't there?

Note also that this is strictly a tripod shooting issue limited to a range of shutter speeds, in all probability.


Here are two images from Jim Kasson's testing: http://blog.kasson.com/?m=201401

First, a flash illuminated image, that is reference. Second 1/80s with camera vertically mounted using an L-bracket. This is worst case.


Best regards
Erik
Erik,

No offense but I trust people who actually use the camera a lot more than Lloyd Chambers.

If Michael eg. says that he has used the A7r for 8 months without noticing shutter vibration then that is sufficient for me…

Whatever the opinion of Mr Chambers may be…

Joris.

« Last Edit: July 14, 2014, 02:22:39 am by ErikKaffehr »
Logged
Erik Kaffehr
 

eronald

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6689
    • My gallery on Instagram
Re: Diglloyd tests the P645Z (Update)
« Reply #83 on: July 14, 2014, 06:33:51 am »

Erik,

 Obviously, if you can crank the ISO up over 400 or 800 with no problems, then in daylight you will be shooting well above 1/125 and you will never see the vibration issues.

 Studio shooters with studio flash also shouldn't see this problem unless there is a lot of ambient.

 I think this one issue you really have to look for, or be working with an ISO 50 mentality - which in fact is what CCD users will be doing before they realize that CMOS has arrived ...

Edmund

Hi Edmund,

Can you explain a bit?

Anyway, what I see is that the shutter vibration related issues are not very visible, so I guess that most observers simply miss them. On the other hand, if we spend significant money on a high res camera and on the very best lenses I guess we should look into all issues reducing sharpness.

The shutter related vibration is noticeable mostly at around 1/20 - 1/40 seconds and up to 1/125. I normally shoot base ISO so I often get into that range when not shooting in full sunlight.

I normally shoot base ISO on all my cameras. The Sony's have little readout noise, but using low ISO minimises shot noise.

Best regards
Erik

Logged
If you appreciate my blog posts help me by following on https://instagram.com/edmundronald

Royce Howland

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 155
    • Vivid Aspect Photography
Re: Diglloyd tests the P645Z
« Reply #84 on: July 14, 2014, 12:20:14 pm »

I received a mailing from a major Japanese photo equipment retailer over the weekend.

In that document they listed the Pentax 25mm f4 as being out of production.

Interesting. Bernard, can you quote the full lens model from that mailing, if they gave it? As you may know, Pentax produced two versions of the 645 25mm f/4 lens. The first was designated D-FA, but it was quickly followed by one designated DA. It was a redesign for which I never saw a particular explanation, but as I understand it the DA was the one available outside of Japan while the D-FA remained in production but was available only in Japan. One pragmatic issue is that apparently the DA will vignette on a 645 full frame, so it appears to be purposely built for the smaller sensor of the 645D and 645Z cameras. That's consistent with the naming.

Curiously, the Ricoh USA web site lists the lens as DA, while the Ricoh Canada site lists it as D-FA. Though checking the product image of the Canadian lens, it clearly shows "DA", not "D-FA", so I believe their product listing is simply incorrect. (When I bought my 25mm a couple of years ago in Canada, the DA version is what I got.) However checking the Ricoh Japan web site I see both versions of the lens are no longer listed in the 645 lens lineup, though the D-FA 25mm still appears on the 645 lens road map (which hasn't been updated since Feb. 2014).

Given that the Pentax 645Z continues the roughly 44x33 mm sensor size and the source of the mailing you received, I would have surmised that if the 25mm was out of production, it was the D-FA version rather than both versions. I'd be very curious if Ricoh has indeed pulled this lens completely from production. They are due to introduce a new wide angle zoom soon, but I'm not sure I could see it replacing the need for the 25mm prime for some photographers.

Royce Howland

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 155
    • Vivid Aspect Photography
Re: Diglloyd tests the P645Z
« Reply #85 on: July 14, 2014, 12:53:58 pm »

Indeed, the Ricoh Japan site does list the D-FA 25mm f/4 as discontinued. But it makes no mention of the DA version; nor does the DA lens show up in the current lens list. So that's a bit confusing.
http://www.ricoh-imaging.co.jp/english/products/lens/index645_list_others.html
http://www.ricoh-imaging.co.jp/english/products/lens/index645_list.html

Paul2660

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4079
    • Photos of Arkansas
Re: Diglloyd tests the P645Z
« Reply #86 on: July 14, 2014, 01:07:37 pm »

B&H still lists the newer version of the Pentax 25mm as non-discontinued.  They have it in stock @ 4.995.00 

When I used the 645D, the 35mm FA was the lens I used most of the time.  Mine was made in Vietnam, but an excellent version of the lens.  I had used it for 4 year prior to the 645D on different Canon/Zork adapter combinations for stitching.  I had read somewhere that Pentax was bringing the 35mm FA back, but that surprised me to have both a 25mm and 35mm in the same lineup. 

Paul

Logged
Paul Caldwell
Little Rock, Arkansas U.S.
www.photosofarkansas.com

ErikKaffehr

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11311
    • Echophoto
Re: Diglloyd tests the P645Z (Update)
« Reply #87 on: July 14, 2014, 01:15:18 pm »

Ronald,

Unfortunately, I have that 50 ISO mentality. I shoot tripod and I feel that base ISO is the best choice, that is the best choice for me.

But, it is clearly possible to crank up ISO, even if increases midtone noise. The advantage of CMOS is mainly in readout noise, as I can see it, so it affect mostly the shadows.

With 50 ISO I am often shooting in the 1/30s to 1/125s range.

Best regards
Erik

Erik,

 Obviously, if you can crank the ISO up over 400 or 800 with no problems, then in daylight you will be shooting well above 1/125 and you will never see the vibration issues.

 Studio shooters with studio flash also shouldn't see this problem unless there is a lot of ambient.

 I think this one issue you really have to look for, or be working with an ISO 50 mentality - which in fact is what CCD users will be doing before they realize that CMOS has arrived ...

Edmund

Logged
Erik Kaffehr
 

JV

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1013
Re: Diglloyd tests the P645Z (Update)
« Reply #88 on: July 14, 2014, 03:40:54 pm »

Erik,

Not in denial mode and I don't have a stake in this as I don't own an A7r.

My point is that I don't like statements like: HE says it MAY have a problem.

Either you know precisely whether it has a problem and under which conditions, or you don't and then you shut up about it.

From what I have read there is nothing preventing the A7r from being an excellent camera when using it handheld, with the native 35 and 55mm FE lenses and using shutter speeds of 1/125 or shorter. Quite frankly that is what a lot of (if not most) people do.

I personally have no interest in an A7r but the A7s does sound very appealing to me.  

Best, Joris.

Hi,

Michael doesn't shoot test targets.

The A7r definitively has shutter related vibrations. Jim Kasson has analysed it truly. Sorry, in this case you are in a fact denial mode.

The reason Michael doesn't see the shutter vibrations may be:

- The image is good enough, although degraded by vibrations. It should be at the 24 MP level
- He is shooting higher ISO so he avoids the 1/15 - 1/125 range
- He is shooting handheld, in which case body adds mass and shutter times tend to be short
- He doesn't print larger than A2, I would think A1 size may show some differences

But, as the issue can be measured, it is obviously there. That said, it needs two images of test charts or subjects with very fine detail viewed at actual pixels one image on top of the other to see the difference.

Now, you may say, why care if you cannot se it?  Good point. On the other hand, why pay for it if it isn't there?

Note also that this is strictly a tripod shooting issue limited to a range of shutter speeds, in all probability.


Here are two images from Jim Kasson's testing: http://blog.kasson.com/?m=201401

First, a flash illuminated image, that is reference. Second 1/80s with camera vertically mounted using an L-bracket. This is worst case.


Best regards
Erik
Logged

Jim Kasson

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2370
    • The Last Word
Re: Diglloyd tests the P645Z (Update)
« Reply #89 on: July 14, 2014, 04:24:51 pm »

My point is that I don't like statements like: HE says it MAY have a problem.

Either you know precisely whether it has a problem and under which conditions, or you don't and then you shut up about it.

From what I have read there is nothing preventing the A7r from being an excellent camera when using it handheld, with the native 35 and 55mm FE lenses and using shutter speeds of 1/125 or shorter. Quite frankly that is what a lot of (if not most) people do.

I may be able to shed some light on the a7R's shutter vibration and its effect on handheld image sharpness.


A description of MTF testing of handheld photos of slanted edge targets
.

Results of handheld testing of the a7 and a7R with the Zony 55mm f/1.8 Sonnar FE lens. The vertical axis on the plots is proportional to cycles per picture height. I didn't figure that out until later.

Comparing the a7R to the Nikon 800E (no mirror lockup) handheld.


Musings on the difficulty of testing handheld cameras.
After doing HH testing for a while, I was so happy to get back to my tripod.

A semi-rigorous discussion of the intellectual underpinnings on hand held testing.

Real-world images (not test targets) from the a7 and a7R and the Zony 55 under similar (as close as I could get to identical) circumstances.

FWIW...

Jim



Telecaster

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3686
Re: Diglloyd tests the P645Z
« Reply #90 on: July 14, 2014, 04:31:52 pm »

Not in denial mode and I don't have a stake in this as I don't own an A7r.

My point is that I don't like statements like: HE says it MAY have a problem.

Either you know precisely whether it has a problem and under which conditions, or you don't and then you shut up about it.

After reading about the A7r shutter vibration thing for awhile I decided to see if I could induce it with my own sample of the camera & various lenses. Here's what I came up with:

– Handheld use: non-issue.
– Tripod use (camera mounted): non-issue.
– Tripod use (lens mounted): slight degradation with longer lenses (300mm & up) visible on-screen at high mag, not noticeable in 14x21" prints (as large as I go).

In the third case I've found that sticking my heaviest flash unit, a Contax TLA–360, on the camera lessens and maybe eliminates the degradation. In fact it was doing a comparison with & without the flash that allowed me to see the issue, slight as it is, in the first place. So I now mount the flash to add mass whenever I use the A7r on a tripod. I tend not to be perfectionist about this stuff, but OTOH I don't mind an easy solution to an issue that may not be visible in real-world conditions but that nonetheless I know exists.   :)

-Dave-
Logged

eronald

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6689
    • My gallery on Instagram
Re: Diglloyd tests the P645Z (Update)
« Reply #91 on: July 14, 2014, 05:07:32 pm »

Erik,

 The Sony probably has a base ISO of around 200 - even the old CCD Leica S2 has an official base ISO at 160. Technology has improved, and also these are microlensed sensors, which gives them a stop more. So where you would be shooting at 1/50 these cameras would be at 1/200 native. I'm not saying the vibration issues don't exist, just they are not very relevant to handheld and actually all daylight landscape users, who in the worst case will set a 200 ISO native camera to 400, lose 1 stop DR on a record-breaking DR camera, and still shoot 1/400 @ F8 on an overcast day.

Edmund

Ronald,

Unfortunately, I have that 50 ISO mentality. I shoot tripod and I feel that base ISO is the best choice, that is the best choice for me.

But, it is clearly possible to crank up ISO, even if increases midtone noise. The advantage of CMOS is mainly in readout noise, as I can see it, so it affect mostly the shadows.

With 50 ISO I am often shooting in the 1/30s to 1/125s range.

Best regards
Erik

« Last Edit: July 14, 2014, 05:23:23 pm by eronald »
Logged
If you appreciate my blog posts help me by following on https://instagram.com/edmundronald

LKaven

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1060
Re: Diglloyd tests the P645Z
« Reply #92 on: July 14, 2014, 08:23:14 pm »

The Exmor in the D810 has a base ISO of 64.  The Exmors that came before it had a base ISO of 100.

tsjanik

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 720
Re: Diglloyd tests the P645Z
« Reply #93 on: July 14, 2014, 11:19:53 pm »

I received a mailing from a major Japanese photo equipment retailer over the weekend.

In that document they listed the Pentax 25mm f4 as being out of production.

Cheers,
Bernard

Bernard,

This comes as something of a surprise given the excitement the Z has generated.  I assume the decision is based on sales, but seems premature since sales generated by the Z have yet to be seen.  As much as I would like to have that lens, the price and size have made me and many other D users hesitate (stitching with the excellent 35mm isn't too bad and a lot less expensive); I'm waiting for the WA zoom.  Maybe as expensive and heavy, but more versatile.

Tom
Logged

ErikKaffehr

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11311
    • Echophoto
Re: Diglloyd tests the P645Z
« Reply #94 on: July 14, 2014, 11:28:26 pm »

Hi,

It seems that there are two different 25/4 lenses involved, according to some other posting.

Best regards
Erik

Bernard,

This comes as something of a surprise given the excitement the Z has generated.  I assume the decision is based on sales, but seems premature since sales generated by the Z have yet to be seen.  As much as I would like to have that lens, the price and size have made me and many other D users hesitate (stitching with the excellent 35mm isn't too bad and a lot less expensive); I'm waiting for the WA zoom.  Maybe as expensive and heavy, but more versatile.

Tom
Logged
Erik Kaffehr
 

tsjanik

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 720
Re: Diglloyd tests the P645Z
« Reply #95 on: July 14, 2014, 11:41:33 pm »

Hi,

It seems that there are two different 25/4 lenses involved, according to some other posting.

Best regards
Erik


Yes, for some unexplained reason Pentax had two versions of this lens but, as the link posted by Royce above indicates, neither is listed on the current lens map.  The other discontinued lens that causes me some surprise is the 600mm A*.  Yes it's expensive, but even as a MF lens it's a gem; I'm sure there aren't many and they cost a fortune to make.  Maybe Ricoh is more practical than the old (pre-Hoya) Pentax.

Tom
 

http://www.ricoh-imaging.co.jp/english/products/lens/index645_list.html
« Last Edit: July 15, 2014, 12:11:58 am by tsjanik »
Logged

ErikKaffehr

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11311
    • Echophoto
Re: Diglloyd tests the P645Z
« Reply #96 on: July 15, 2014, 04:01:21 am »

Hi,

A few comments.

In general I presume that folks buy the A7r because of the resolution. Also, it seems that many quite a few users buy A7r as a an high resolution high DR option to Canon. So I presume that resolution is at premium for many users.

I would agree that the vibration is not much a problem handheld shooting, as shorter times are generally used handheld. Also, DSLRs have mirror vibration that is usually significant.

Where the effect is measureable is:

- on tripod
- time range 1/4 - 1/250 or so

The vibration is enough to measurable degrade the image. Probably not enough to cause visual degradation in A2 size prints. The amount image degradation depends a lot on pivot points, inertia of rotation, focal length and dampening.

The A7 does not have this problem using the EFC, so in many cases it may be the better choice.

Actually, I am mostly shooting tripod mounted, and I often shoot in the 1/15 - 1/60 range -  always with MLU. So for me the shutter vibration is relevant.

Knowledge of the vibration issue may be helpful in reducing the problem, like increasing ISO to get into a less problematic shutter speed range.

I don’t own neither A7 nor A7r, but I may buy a later generation A# camera if they make them to my liking.

Best regards
Erik


After reading about the A7r shutter vibration thing for awhile I decided to see if I could induce it with my own sample of the camera & various lenses. Here's what I came up with:

– Handheld use: non-issue.
– Tripod use (camera mounted): non-issue.
– Tripod use (lens mounted): slight degradation with longer lenses (300mm & up) visible on-screen at high mag, not noticeable in 14x21" prints (as large as I go).

In the third case I've found that sticking my heaviest flash unit, a Contax TLA–360, on the camera lessens and maybe eliminates the degradation. In fact it was doing a comparison with & without the flash that allowed me to see the issue, slight as it is, in the first place. So I now mount the flash to add mass whenever I use the A7r on a tripod. I tend not to be perfectionist about this stuff, but OTOH I don't mind an easy solution to an issue that may not be visible in real-world conditions but that nonetheless I know exists.   :)

-Dave-
« Last Edit: July 15, 2014, 04:15:47 am by ErikKaffehr »
Logged
Erik Kaffehr
 

ErikKaffehr

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11311
    • Echophoto
Re: Diglloyd tests the P645Z (Update)
« Reply #97 on: July 15, 2014, 04:20:07 am »

Jim,

Thanks for chiming in.

I am most concerned about high resolution work on tripod. I assume that tripod is pretty necessary to make full use of the resolution, but i may be wrong.

Best regards
Erik

I may be able to shed some light on the a7R's shutter vibration and its effect on handheld image sharpness.


A description of MTF testing of handheld photos of slanted edge targets
.

Results of handheld testing of the a7 and a7R with the Zony 55mm f/1.8 Sonnar FE lens. The vertical axis on the plots is proportional to cycles per picture height. I didn't figure that out until later.

Comparing the a7R to the Nikon 800E (no mirror lockup) handheld.


Musings on the difficulty of testing handheld cameras.
After doing HH testing for a while, I was so happy to get back to my tripod.

A semi-rigorous discussion of the intellectual underpinnings on hand held testing.

Real-world images (not test targets) from the a7 and a7R and the Zony 55 under similar (as close as I could get to identical) circumstances.

FWIW...

Jim




Logged
Erik Kaffehr
 

Jim Kasson

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2370
    • The Last Word
Re: Diglloyd tests the P645Z (Update)
« Reply #98 on: July 15, 2014, 12:18:55 pm »

I am most concerned about high resolution work on tripod. I assume that tripod is pretty necessary to make full use of the resolution, but i may be wrong.

Erik, I'm going to make my response in the context of big, focal plane shutter, cameras in general, rather than the Sony a7R, which is a bit of a red herring on this thread, since it has a set of shutter characteristics that don't apply to any medium format camera. WRT the 645Z, Lloyd's charts indicate to me that the camera;s shutter shock is quite a bit lower than the a7R's, although the star target that Lloyd uses makes getting any quantitative data off the image impossible -- at least for me. As an aside the crosses on the ISO 12233 chart are much better for this.

Enough preamble. On to your point. I'm assuming that anyone buying a 645Z wants to use all 50 MP; otherwise, why not get a D8x0, have a big choice of lenses, and save a bundle? One non-vibrational impediment to using all those pixels is focusing. In doing handheld work with the ISO 12233 target and a slanted edge target for SFR analysis, I was totally flummoxed when working with manual focus lenses. I gave it up and had to go with AF lenses, which are thin on the ground for the alpha 7 line. The reason was that with manual focus slight movements of the camera between focusing and shutter release resulted in focus errors that totally swamped out the resolving power of the lens and the camera. This was a particular problem with the a7R, since focusing had to be done at taking aperture when handholding, but would be a problem with a DSLR, which would have the advantage of the ability to focus wide open, but the disadvantage of a much less precise way to judge focus than live view.

So, leaving vibration out of it, I think you need a tripod to consistently use all that resolution. Electronic flash and AF lenses might ameliorate this. BTW, a lot of studio electronic flash systems have fairly long (>1ms for t.1) flash durations at some or all power settings.

Let's consider vibration. If you're shooting the 645Z handheld, you don't want to hold it at arms length for any length of time. That means you can't use live view. You want to be able to accurately frame the shot. That means you can't use mirror lockup. So you're going to have to suffer mirror slap. That alone is going to make it hard to use all those 50 MP. Hassy has a programmable delay between mirror up and first curtain release that apparently helps. I don't know if Pentax does.

As an aside, one thing that helped with electronic flash pictures with the a7R should also help on the 645Z: use trailing curtain synch and a longish (1/25 was a good number for the a7R) shutter speed.

All that is a long-winded way of saying that I agree with you.

Jim

Bart_van_der_Wolf

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8919
Re: Diglloyd tests the P645Z (Update)
« Reply #99 on: July 15, 2014, 12:38:00 pm »

WRT the 645Z, Lloyd's charts indicate to me that the camera;s shutter shock is quite a bit lower than the a7R's, although the star target that Lloyd uses makes getting any quantitative data off the image impossible -- at least for me. As an aside the crosses on the ISO 12233 chart are much better for this.

Actually, most bi-tonal patterns are not suited for quantitative analysis. They only allow a quick visual impression, but aliasing artifacts and phase alignment of pattern and sensel grid will make such comparisons error prone. Slanted edges are very well usable, because they allow oversampling of sensor resolution, and their usual close to orthogonal orientation allows to easily distinguish between horizontal and vertical resolution.

Quote
[..]  with manual focus slight movements of the camera between focusing and shutter release resulted in focus errors that totally swamped out the resolving power of the lens and the camera.

Yes, often under rated, defocus kills resolution pretty quickly, and the really critical DOF zone is thin (result of using a small COC).

Quote
So, leaving vibration out of it, I think you need a tripod to consistently use all that resolution. Electronic flash and AF lenses might ameliorate this. BTW, a lot of studio electronic flash systems have fairly long (>1ms for t.1) flash durations at some or all power settings.

Indeed.

Cheers,
Bart
Logged
== If you do what you did, you'll get what you got. ==
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6   Go Up