[fearview]

see the point it got for autofocusing? only 7.. on what base they measured this beauty?

did they compared it with Canon's Full Frame.. oh please.. :ugh:

[falconeye]

Of course, it doesn't make sense to compare MF to FF.

But it isn't as unreasonable as it seems.

Many tests compare APSC to FF, an invalid test too. But if you do, you'll notice that resolution and DR go up while speed and features don't go down. With MF vs. FF, resolution goes up, DR goes up just a bit and speed and features typically go down. It isn't unreasonable to mention this to readers unaware of it (but who would be? ...).

The mistake many reviewers do is to mix up test and trivialities. An introductory article about the pro and cons of MF and a test of the 645D against its peers would have been more interesting even to unaware readers.

And then to rate the 645D down on features or performance is ridiculous when it may be best in its class for both.

[ghelary]

Of course, it doesn't make sense to compare MF to FF.

But it isn't as unreasonable as it seems.

Many tests compare APSC to FF, an invalid test too. But if you do, you'll notice that resolution and DR go up while speed and features don't go down. With MF vs. FF, resolution goes up, DR goes up just a bit and speed and features typically go down. It isn't unreasonable to mention this to readers unaware of it (but who would be? ...).

The mistake many reviewers do is to mix up test and trivialities. An introductory article about the pro and cons of MF and a test of the 645D against its peers would have been more interesting even to unaware readers.

And then to rate the 645D down on features or performance is ridiculous when it may be best in its class for both.

To me, it makes sense to compare the D3X to the 645D for specific practices like landscape, budgets for the systems are comparable, so one may consider one or the other systems.

IMO, that makes sense to compare completely different approaches in the light of a domain of photography. What is the best camera for studio? For weddings? For landscapes? For street photography? Photozone does this, and I think it's the best approach.

For the later for example, I wouldn't call it an heresy to compare a mirrorless camera, to a Leica X1, to a Pentax K5 + prime. Ultimately what is better is a personal answer but a comparison of the systems in a magazine makes sense to me.

[RonHendriks1966]

Well 86 % isn't that bad to me.

It's good to mention that it doesn't support LiveView, since we are all used to it by now. Certenly when you do landscape, using a tripod makes sence to having LiveView.

The 645D is a slow camera. It can make only 1.1 fps and it probably will handle like 20 frames in one minute. So that is slow when you ever have used a current DSLR. Or even handled a Hassie, that can run 60 frames in one minute.

Would love to read the article.

[fast50]

Advanced Photographer magazine (no I've not seen it before either...) gave it 92% in their latest issue.

"Adored using it", apparently.

[ve2vfd]

I'm almost certain that the population that would buy a 645D is not in its vast majority anywhere is the readership of amateur photography.

Touché!

Pat

[Craig66]

What are you thinking Pentax. A $12,000.AU camera.

Hope they only made a few. Because that's all they'll sell.

I rather buy a motorbike at that price.

[fearview]

What are you thinking Pentax. A $12,000.AU camera.

Hope they only made a few. Because that's all they'll sell.

I rather buy a motorbike at that price.

obviously. not for you. for us. for me. for everybody who still thinking...

well i would rather buy...

[Kunzite]

What are you thinking Pentax. A $12,000.AU camera.

Hope they only made a few. Because that's all they'll sell.

I rather buy a motorbike at that price.

Ridiculous. The 645D is a success story, period.

[ghelary]

What are you thinking Pentax. A $12,000.AU camera.

Hope they only made a few. Because that's all they'll sell.

I rather buy a motorbike at that price.

There are also watches that sells and sell well for twice that price. You reasonning is wrong in many ways.

Anyway, the release of the camera in the world outside Japan was delayed for 8 months because they couldn't keep up with the demand in Japan, and now there is still a long waiting list for it.

An this was before the magazine/websites started releasing tests for the camera.

And this camera is not even the second gen!

[Rondec]

What are you thinking Pentax. A $12,000.AU camera.

Hope they only made a few. Because that's all they'll sell.

I rather buy a motorbike at that price.

Hoya is interested in profit, not in total sales. I imagine the 645D will make similar levels of profit to any of their other lines of cameras, maybe more.

Beyond which, have you priced a D3x lately?

[ogl]

To me, it makes sense to compare the D3X to the 645D for specific practices like landscape, budgets for the systems are comparable, so one may consider one or the other systems.

Already done.
Pentax 645D Digital Camera - First Shots - The Imaging Resource!

FF has no any chance in terms of IQ and even high ISO resolution+noise.

[Ivan Glisin]

they gave it 86 point only? oh cmon AP!

Things that do not matter that much are scored lower, dragging the total score down. I can hardly imagine 645D being used at F1 races or basketball games, or a pro expecting to rely on AWB in order to skip color correction in post production.

All that matters to an MF camera is good, and that is superb image quality and handling.

[m8o]

they gave it 86 point only? oh cmon AP!

And where does that stand when normalized across all cameras reviewed? What gets rated above 86? Anything?

[benjikan]

Once again, it seems it got marked down because Pentax threw another curve ball by giving them a camera that's not easily classifiable according to the rest of the market.

And then the reviewers were confused as hell by it.

Just replace the word "Reviewers" with "IDIOTS" and it becomes self evident...