[ogl]

VERY LARGE PHOTOS!!!

GANREF | ?????? PENTAX 645D ?????????? | ???????????

Second series
GANREF | ?????? PENTAX 645D ?????????????? | ???????????

Third series - comparision of 645D/K-7/5D Mark II
GANREF | ??????????? 2010?6???????????????

I see 5D Mark II has no chances with landscapes photos compared to 645D.

Very interesting surprise -
ISO1000 and 1600 of 645D is not worse than FF.

---

Last edited by ogl; 05-27-2010 at 10:00 PM.

[SteveM]

VERY LARGE PHOTOS!!!

GANREF | ?????? PENTAX 645D ?????????? | ???????????

Second series
GANREF | ?????? PENTAX 645D ?????????????? | ???????????

Third series - comparision of 645D/K-7/5D Mark II
GANREF | ??????????? 2010?6???????????????

I see 5D Mark II has no chances with landscapes photos compared to 645D.

Very interesting surprise -
ISO1000 and 1600 of 645D is not worse than FF.

That's not helping the CBA........the 5D Mark II sure took a beating for that style of photography....

[Bob YILDIRAN]

Thank you for the leads.

Third series could suffice to put an end to all discussions claiming digital FF-35mm being very close to MF quality. To my eyes there is a world of difference; check the acutance and microcontrast of the 645D shots against the 5DII, not only the resolution. IMHO, CCD sensor with no (or weak) AA filter has its own characteristics to be not duplicated with any CMOS combination. Even the color rendition is different...

As if the 645D shots began to look more and more like the Leica M9 offered in MF format...

[ogl]

K-7 is not bad and I'd say very good vs 5D Mk II.

[Digitalis]

the 5D MKIII file looks like mush, there isn't any detail at the per-pixel level at ISO200 I get similar results from my 1DSMKIII albeit I use primes, even then the image quality doesn't improve much.

I'm surprised how well the K-7 hold up against the 5DMKII, The 645D carries on in the spirit of the K-7 by delivering Very high resolution images with detailed resolution of micro-contrast and superb tonal rendition.

i'm also impressed by the sheer lack of optical aberrations in these samples the 80-160 f/4.5 and the 45-85mm f/4.5 were a lenses I only used fleetingly...I prefer primes but it's great to see that zoom lenses like that holding their own against mamiya, even hasselblad's zoom lens offerings.

yes the higher ISO images are extremely good, the 5D has more chroma noise present at Iso200 and it disappears at ISO 1000 due to canon's on chip noise reduction. the K-7 and 645D both allow the photographer to leave the image as is or clean it up; which is in my mind, a superior approach to dealing with image quality issues,let the user decide.

[Matus]

Just had a look at the first comparison shots (winter forest). They must have screwed up something with the Canon as this camera is capable of delivering very clean and sharp images. I seem to recall this kind of issue when the Canon came out which was supposed to be solved soon after. Also - I was shooting recently one session with 5DMK-II and the detail was great.

Still - am I the only one bothered by the output of 645D with strange violet color in the fine brown branches? I guess it is kind-of moire or something. Also the output looks to me somewhat unnatural - like over sharpened, but I am not sure. Still - the amount of detail is great.

One obvious advantage of the "cropped" format - as the edges are omitted there is no deterioration noticeable that is seen with no 5DMK-II and K7.

Still - I can stop thinking of the quality that 30 Mpix sensor of "true" 645 size could deliver ...

[wshi]

Just had a look at the first comparison shots (winter forest). They must have screwed up something with the Canon as this camera is capable of delivering very clean and sharp images. I seem to recall this kind of issue when the Canon came out which was supposed to be solved soon after. Also - I was shooting recently one session with 5DMK-II and the detail was great.

...

I agree that it looks like they screwed something up with the 5D mkII. Looking at the tree in the middle against the mountain background, the Canon looks far too blurry.

[Pål Jensen]

Still - am I the only one bothered by the output of 645D with strange violet color in the fine brown branches? I guess it is kind-of moire or something. Also the output looks to me somewhat unnatural - like over sharpened, but I am not sure. ..

Well, since no other DSLR produce sharp images, photos made with the 645D looks oversharpened....

[Digitalis]

I agree that it looks like they screwed something up with the 5D mkII. Looking at the tree in the middle against the mountain background, the Canon looks far too blurry.

at f/8 and at those distances you're calling out a possible mis focus? Well if a canon DSLR can't get it right then isn't that a testament to the improved auto focus on the K-7 and 645D.

Assuming that is the case, then take a look a the other samples where the 5D clearly falls short in terms of per-pixel sharpness.

[er1kksen]

Very interesting surprise -
ISO1000 and 1600 of 645D is not worse than FF.

I have to admit I am not surprised at all. People in the know have been telling us for quite a while that MF sensors, when pushed to higher ISOs, often equal or surpass the hottest new FF cameras at equal output sizes. The sensors aren't rated to higher ISOs because there's a lower quality tolerance in the MF world.

I've given up on repeating that every time someone mentions MF's "poor high-ISO performance". Everyone will see for themselves soon enough. The P65+ has already demonstrated that MF can trounce state-of-the-art FF at high ISO but obviously doesn't have the market and publicity that the 645D is getting.

[Digitalis]

I've given up on repeating that every time someone mentions MF's "poor high-ISO performance". Everyone will see for themselves soon enough. The P65+ has already demonstrated that MF can trounce state-of-the-art FF at high ISO

you should see what the monochrome medium format digital backs can do. Their IQ at higher ISO settings is nothing short of astonishing.

[surfotog]

Am I the only one who would like to see a monochrome only version of the 645D?

[Digitalis]

Am I the only one who would like to see a monochrome only version of the 645D?

yes I would like to see one,however it is highly unlikely that one will ever be released: due to the fact that the sensors used in digital monochrome backs have to be absolutely flawless in order to be usable. With no tolerance for any faults of any kind these monochrome backs carry a hefty premium.

[wshi]

at f/8 and at those distances you're calling out a possible mis focus? Well if a canon DSLR can't get it right then isn't that a testament to the improved auto focus on the K-7 and 645D.

Assuming that is the case, then take a look a the other samples where the 5D clearly falls short in terms of per-pixel sharpness.

Admittedly, I formed this opinion based on the impression that the 5DII should be plenty capable of handling such a situation. I guess I just find it hard to believe that it wouldn't be able to, and would think that a test error would be more likely.

[Digitalis]

I use the 1DSMKIII with L series primes and on occasion zooms and I can tell you that that image quality from the 5D MKII is pretty much as good as it gets from canon. I like the rendering of pentax cameras the images have more texture in them than my full frame canon cameras are capable of delivering. You can see the difference in the prints, which is where it really matters.

I'm considering selling them in favour of Nikon though, considering that the canon gear belongs to my family everyone has to agree with my decision...Though I will sell the lenses I bought: I'm keeping that EF 200mm f/1.8L and 400mm f/2.8L IS I use my canons primarily for sports the 200mm f/1.8L is fantastic with a teleconverter...so is the 400L. Though the nikon cameras with their superior tracking AF and high frame rates, and unsurpassed high ISO capabilities are soon going to be taking the place of the canon DSLRS.

The pentax 645D fills a niche for landscape photographers. APS-C is good for general purpose photojournalism. However, a 40MP reduced frame 645 camera will provide the image quality I desire, especially the ability to make very large prints. Fine-art Landscape photography has been the realm of 4X5 and 8X10 view cameras and at last a camera manufacturer has made a self contained High resolution weather sealed digital SLR capable of surpassing 4X5, even matching 8X10*

I have been aching for such a camera to be made, that is why My family has stuck with pentax through 50 years. And with my pentax 67 800mm f/6.7 ED IF lens I'm sure the pentax 645 will be a very useful tool for my wildlife work as well. As you can see I have been gearing up in preparation for a move to medium format digital at long last.

*especially in such a small package. My ebony 8X10 weights 5.5 kg fully loaded, my Horseman weighs 2.4Kg fully loaded (I have yet to hear anyone ask for recommendation for a walk around lens for 8X10 format). Medium format digital backs on 4X5 view cameras are rather bulky; sure Sinar,Horseman,Alpa and Gilde has made some solutions in that regard but they have their own set of limitations and draw backs - notably the restriction of camera movements and the lenses designed for these backs often have restrictions of their own(smaller image circles which further restrict the use of camera movements).