Rumor of Pentax D FA 645 25mm f/4

Kunzite · 02-09-2011, 09:44 AM

Originally posted by Art Vandelay II

The point is I don't think it will utterly trash the 1Ds Mk IV, at least not so enough to justify the compromises and extra cost a person will have to make by buying into the 645D system. The next 1Ds will have a wider ISO range, better off camera flash system, faster autofocus, and a much more versatile lens system.

I was specifically talking about image quality. Can an incremental upgrade (1DsMkIV) surpass such a difference? (scroll down to see the images)
Pentax 645D Digital Camera - First Shots - The Imaging Resource!

Art Vandelay II · 02-09-2011, 10:08 AM

Originally posted by Kunzite

I was specifically talking about image quality. Can an incremental upgrade (1DsMkIV) surpass such a difference?

Sharpness is just one aspect of image quality now isn't it? I don't think full frame DSLR's have a chance of competing with the 645D on that front, but sharpness doesn't do me a bit of good if they don't have the lens system that can render out of focus regions like this. I've always loved medium format photos with this look. That kind of depth is very tough to achieve, or in some cases impossible with 35mm, but I haven't seen any shots like that from the 654D yet. This 645D shot isn't bad, but that could easily be done using 35mm. The bottom line is the shots people used to take with a "standard" 75mm f/2.8 in film aren't going to look the same now that they are using a 55mm f/2.8 as their standard lens. It's like the whole APS-C vs full frame debate all over again, just one size up the food chain.

ogl · 02-09-2011, 11:12 AM

Originally posted by Art Vandelay II

The point is I don't think it will utterly trash the 1Ds Mk IV, at least not so enough to justify the compromises and extra cost a person will have to make by buying into the 645D system. The next 1Ds will have a wider ISO range, better off camera flash system, faster autofocus, and a much more versatile lens system.

Pentax lens lineup are 17 lenses.

From 25 till 600 mm.

To compare 21 MP FF camera and 40 MP MF camera is some sort of trolling.

Art Vandelay II · 02-09-2011, 11:40 AM

OGL, I've never trolled once in my life. I've pointed out a very real issue with the 645D system. That is, if you are a portrait photographer that likes to use shallow DOF Pentax doesn't currently offer any lenses faster than f/2.8. A 55mm f/2.8 does not equal the look people used to get from a 75mm f/2.8 on the 645N II.

In the film days a 150mm f/2.8 lens was a great portrait lens, but they're going to need something like a 110mm f/2 to get the same look from the 645D. I see they have a lens in that range planned, so maybe it will have a wide enough aperture to capture the look that the 150mm f/2.8 can produce on film, but I'm guessing the max aperture on it will also be f/2.8.

Also, I never compared it to the current Canon 1DS, I said the next Canon 1DS. Pretty much everyone knows the next 1DS will have 35+ megapixels, we just don't know when it will be released.

ogl · 02-09-2011, 12:08 PM

Originally posted by Art Vandelay II

That is, if you are a portrait photographer that likes to use shallow DOF Pentax doesn't currently offer any lenses faster than f/2.8. A 55mm f/2.8 does not equal the look people used to get from a 75mm f/2.8 on the 645N II.

Also, I never compared it to the current Canon 1DS, I said the next Canon 1DS. Pretty much everyone knows the next 1DS will have 35+ megapixels, we just don't know when it will be released.

f/2.8 at 645D is equal to f/2.1 for 135 format.
when 645D will have 60 MP FF MF sensor, f/2.8 will be equivalent of f/1.6.

Do you prefer portrait with one sharp eye?

Art Vandelay II · 02-09-2011, 12:26 PM

Originally posted by ogl

when 645D will have 60 MP FF MF sensor, f/2.8 will be equivalent of f/1.6.

That's a whole different story. IF Pentax makes a full frame medium format 645D then the examples I gave above are no longer relevant because the digital sensor will be the same size as 120 film. However, do they plan on doing that? They've obviously been in no rush to make a full frame 35mm DSLR.

Quote:

Do you prefer portrait with one sharp eye?

No, but I do like portraits like this:

lindsey | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

And Pentax doesn't have a lens that can do that for the 645D. This is also nice. I haven't done the exact calculation but Pentax would need something like a 200mm f/2.8 for that. The 200mm f/4 isn't going to give you that same look.

Emacs · 02-09-2011, 01:22 PM

Originally posted by Art Vandelay II

That's a whole different story. IF Pentax makes a full frame medium format 645D then the examples I gave above are no longer relevant because the digital sensor will be the same size as 120 film. However, do they plan on doing that? They've obviously been in no rush to make a full frame 35mm DSLR.

The bokeh is a cheap trick that helps to hide photographer inability of proper composition. The whines about the lack of bokeh helps to hide being the bold troll.

gazonk · 02-09-2011, 01:28 PM

Originally posted by Art Vandelay II

That's a whole different story. IF Pentax makes a full frame medium format 645D then the examples I gave above are no longer relevant because the digital sensor will be the same size as 120 film. However, do they plan on doing that?

Everything (including the newer sensors announced) points at larger sensors. Also, why else make the 25mm capable of covering more than the 55mm diagonal of the current sensor?

Art Vandelay II · 02-09-2011, 02:01 PM

Originally posted by Emacs

The bokeh is a cheap trick that helps to hide photographer inability of proper composition.

That's only true if that's the only tool in your bag. Smooth bokeh + nice composition can create a really nice image if used properly. Also, pointing out a fact is not trolling. If you are offended by facts then you are wayyyy to vested into a brand when someone points out a problem with a product.

Originally posted by gazonk

Everything (including the newer sensors announced) points at larger sensors. Also, why else make the 25mm capable of covering more than the 55mm diagonal of the current sensor?

I hope you're right, I just haven't read any confirmation on it.

Emacs · 02-09-2011, 02:28 PM

Originally posted by Art Vandelay II

That's only true if that's the only tool in your bag. Smooth bokeh + nice composition can create a really nice image if used properly. Also, pointing out a fact is not trolling. If you are offended by facts then you are wayyyy to vested into a brand when someone points out a problem with a product.

Smooth bokeh ≠ blurred to dead background, especially one produced by nikon, canon and zeiss lenses with their overcorrected spherical aberrations.
BTW, I was so enthusiastic about bokeh when I just started shooting. Now I try to avoid strong blurring whenever possible. Of course, it helps produce nice effects sometimes, but I suppose you overrates its value.

Art Vandelay II · 02-09-2011, 02:37 PM

Originally posted by Emacs

BTW, I was so enthusiastic about bokeh when I just started shooting. Now I try to avoid strong blurring whenever possible. Of course, it helps produce nice effects sometimes, but I suppose you overrates its value.

Feel free to look through my Flickr photo stream; you'll find very few portraits with blurred out backgrounds in it. However, when you need it, you need it. Sometimes you have no choice. Also, I don't care for the my technique is better than your technique attitude. There are many styles of photography I dislike, but I'm not going to pretend like the style I've chosen for myself is superior to the ones I dislike. It's all just a personal preference.

Emacs · 02-09-2011, 03:09 PM

Originally posted by Art Vandelay II

Feel free to look through my Flickr photo stream; you'll find very few portraits with blurred out backgrounds in it. However, when you need it, you need it. Sometimes you have no choice. Also, I don't care for the my technique is better than your technique attitude. There are many styles of photography I dislike, but I'm not going to pretend like the style I've chosen for myself is superior to the ones I dislike. It's all just a personal preference.

IMO 645D doesn't suit "sometimes" assumption at all. It's not the reporter camera but the tool for shooting landscapes and studio. Although if you really need background blurred, you always can open the aperture to 2.8: 2.1 135 equivalent would be enough I guess.

ogl · 02-10-2011, 05:04 AM

Originally posted by Art Vandelay II

And Pentax doesn't have a lens that can do that for the 645D.

He-he...It's rather mediocre bokeh...

gazonk · 02-10-2011, 05:55 AM

This guy over at Chris Willson's flickr Photostream is amazed to hear that you can't shoot portraits with nice bokeh with the 645D: Monkey Stare | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

ogl · 02-10-2011, 07:23 AM

Originally posted by gazonk

This guy over at Chris Willson's flickr Photostream is amazed to hear that you can't shoot portraits with nice bokeh with the 645D: Monkey Stare | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

+10

There is 67 to 645 adapter - Chris uses 105/2.4, by the way...

A lot of portraits with D FA 645 55mm F2.8

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Pentax FA 31 lim for landscape? how it compares to zeiss 25mm?	dedmozaj	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	3	05-08-2010 03:14 AM
Pentax 18-25mm Lens at MLB Night Game?	Biro	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	7	06-08-2009 07:16 PM
Pentax FA 35mm f2 v DA 25mm f2.8 Ltd Macro	Murphy2004	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	15	11-20-2008 04:39 PM
For Sale - Sold: Zeiss ZK 25mm / f2.8 Pentax K KA	dkreithen	Sold Items	2	11-02-2008 07:48 AM

02-09-2011, 09:44 AM	#46
Kunzite Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Romania Posts: 15,132	Originally posted by Art Vandelay II The point is I don't think it will utterly trash the 1Ds Mk IV, at least not so enough to justify the compromises and extra cost a person will have to make by buying into the 645D system. The next 1Ds will have a wider ISO range, better off camera flash system, faster autofocus, and a much more versatile lens system. I was specifically talking about image quality. Can an incremental upgrade (1DsMkIV) surpass such a difference? (scroll down to see the images) Pentax 645D Digital Camera - First Shots - The Imaging Resource!

02-09-2011, 10:08 AM	#47
Art Vandelay II Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Charlotte, NC Photos: Gallery Posts: 886	Originally posted by Kunzite I was specifically talking about image quality. Can an incremental upgrade (1DsMkIV) surpass such a difference? Sharpness is just one aspect of image quality now isn't it? I don't think full frame DSLR's have a chance of competing with the 645D on that front, but sharpness doesn't do me a bit of good if they don't have the lens system that can render out of focus regions like this. I've always loved medium format photos with this look. That kind of depth is very tough to achieve, or in some cases impossible with 35mm, but I haven't seen any shots like that from the 654D yet. This 645D shot isn't bad, but that could easily be done using 35mm. The bottom line is the shots people used to take with a "standard" 75mm f/2.8 in film aren't going to look the same now that they are using a 55mm f/2.8 as their standard lens. It's like the whole APS-C vs full frame debate all over again, just one size up the food chain.

02-09-2011, 11:12 AM	#48
ogl Banned Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Sankt Peterburg Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 8,382	Originally posted by Art Vandelay II The point is I don't think it will utterly trash the 1Ds Mk IV, at least not so enough to justify the compromises and extra cost a person will have to make by buying into the 645D system. The next 1Ds will have a wider ISO range, better off camera flash system, faster autofocus, and a much more versatile lens system. Pentax lens lineup are 17 lenses. From 25 till 600 mm. To compare 21 MP FF camera and 40 MP MF camera is some sort of trolling.

02-09-2011, 11:40 AM	#49
Art Vandelay II Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Charlotte, NC Photos: Gallery Posts: 886	OGL, I've never trolled once in my life. I've pointed out a very real issue with the 645D system. That is, if you are a portrait photographer that likes to use shallow DOF Pentax doesn't currently offer any lenses faster than f/2.8. A 55mm f/2.8 does not equal the look people used to get from a 75mm f/2.8 on the 645N II. In the film days a 150mm f/2.8 lens was a great portrait lens, but they're going to need something like a 110mm f/2 to get the same look from the 645D. I see they have a lens in that range planned, so maybe it will have a wide enough aperture to capture the look that the 150mm f/2.8 can produce on film, but I'm guessing the max aperture on it will also be f/2.8. Also, I never compared it to the current Canon 1DS, I said the next Canon 1DS. Pretty much everyone knows the next 1DS will have 35+ megapixels, we just don't know when it will be released.

02-09-2011, 12:08 PM	#50
ogl Banned Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Sankt Peterburg Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 8,382	Originally posted by Art Vandelay II That is, if you are a portrait photographer that likes to use shallow DOF Pentax doesn't currently offer any lenses faster than f/2.8. A 55mm f/2.8 does not equal the look people used to get from a 75mm f/2.8 on the 645N II. Also, I never compared it to the current Canon 1DS, I said the next Canon 1DS. Pretty much everyone knows the next 1DS will have 35+ megapixels, we just don't know when it will be released. f/2.8 at 645D is equal to f/2.1 for 135 format. when 645D will have 60 MP FF MF sensor, f/2.8 will be equivalent of f/1.6. Do you prefer portrait with one sharp eye?

02-09-2011, 12:26 PM	#51
Art Vandelay II Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Charlotte, NC Photos: Gallery Posts: 886	Originally posted by ogl when 645D will have 60 MP FF MF sensor, f/2.8 will be equivalent of f/1.6. That's a whole different story. IF Pentax makes a full frame medium format 645D then the examples I gave above are no longer relevant because the digital sensor will be the same size as 120 film. However, do they plan on doing that? They've obviously been in no rush to make a full frame 35mm DSLR. Quote: Do you prefer portrait with one sharp eye? No, but I do like portraits like this: lindsey \| Flickr - Photo Sharing! And Pentax doesn't have a lens that can do that for the 645D. This is also nice. I haven't done the exact calculation but Pentax would need something like a 200mm f/2.8 for that. The 200mm f/4 isn't going to give you that same look.

02-09-2011, 01:22 PM	#52
Emacs Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2010 Location: Moscow Posts: 1,223	Originally posted by Art Vandelay II That's a whole different story. IF Pentax makes a full frame medium format 645D then the examples I gave above are no longer relevant because the digital sensor will be the same size as 120 film. However, do they plan on doing that? They've obviously been in no rush to make a full frame 35mm DSLR. The bokeh is a cheap trick that helps to hide photographer inability of proper composition. The whines about the lack of bokeh helps to hide being the bold troll.

02-09-2011, 01:28 PM	#53
gazonk Pentaxian Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Oslo area, Norway Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,746	Originally posted by Art Vandelay II That's a whole different story. IF Pentax makes a full frame medium format 645D then the examples I gave above are no longer relevant because the digital sensor will be the same size as 120 film. However, do they plan on doing that? Everything (including the newer sensors announced) points at larger sensors. Also, why else make the 25mm capable of covering more than the 55mm diagonal of the current sensor?

02-09-2011, 02:01 PM	#54
Art Vandelay II Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Charlotte, NC Photos: Gallery Posts: 886	Originally posted by Emacs The bokeh is a cheap trick that helps to hide photographer inability of proper composition. That's only true if that's the only tool in your bag. Smooth bokeh + nice composition can create a really nice image if used properly. Also, pointing out a fact is not trolling. If you are offended by facts then you are wayyyy to vested into a brand when someone points out a problem with a product. Originally posted by gazonk Everything (including the newer sensors announced) points at larger sensors. Also, why else make the 25mm capable of covering more than the 55mm diagonal of the current sensor? I hope you're right, I just haven't read any confirmation on it.

02-09-2011, 02:28 PM	#55
Emacs Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2010 Location: Moscow Posts: 1,223	Originally posted by Art Vandelay II That's only true if that's the only tool in your bag. Smooth bokeh + nice composition can create a really nice image if used properly. Also, pointing out a fact is not trolling. If you are offended by facts then you are wayyyy to vested into a brand when someone points out a problem with a product. Smooth bokeh ≠ blurred to dead background, especially one produced by nikon, canon and zeiss lenses with their overcorrected spherical aberrations. BTW, I was so enthusiastic about bokeh when I just started shooting. Now I try to avoid strong blurring whenever possible. Of course, it helps produce nice effects sometimes, but I suppose you overrates its value.

02-09-2011, 02:37 PM	#56
Art Vandelay II Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Charlotte, NC Photos: Gallery Posts: 886	Originally posted by Emacs BTW, I was so enthusiastic about bokeh when I just started shooting. Now I try to avoid strong blurring whenever possible. Of course, it helps produce nice effects sometimes, but I suppose you overrates its value. Feel free to look through my Flickr photo stream; you'll find very few portraits with blurred out backgrounds in it. However, when you need it, you need it. Sometimes you have no choice. Also, I don't care for the my technique is better than your technique attitude. There are many styles of photography I dislike, but I'm not going to pretend like the style I've chosen for myself is superior to the ones I dislike. It's all just a personal preference.

02-09-2011, 03:09 PM	#57
Emacs Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2010 Location: Moscow Posts: 1,223	Originally posted by Art Vandelay II Feel free to look through my Flickr photo stream; you'll find very few portraits with blurred out backgrounds in it. However, when you need it, you need it. Sometimes you have no choice. Also, I don't care for the my technique is better than your technique attitude. There are many styles of photography I dislike, but I'm not going to pretend like the style I've chosen for myself is superior to the ones I dislike. It's all just a personal preference. IMO 645D doesn't suit "sometimes" assumption at all. It's not the reporter camera but the tool for shooting landscapes and studio. Although if you really need background blurred, you always can open the aperture to 2.8: 2.1 135 equivalent would be enough I guess.

02-10-2011, 05:04 AM	#58
ogl Banned Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Sankt Peterburg Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 8,382	Originally posted by Art Vandelay II And Pentax doesn't have a lens that can do that for the 645D. He-he...It's rather mediocre bokeh...

02-10-2011, 05:55 AM	#59
gazonk Pentaxian Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Oslo area, Norway Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,746	This guy over at Chris Willson's flickr Photostream is amazed to hear that you can't shoot portraits with nice bokeh with the 645D: Monkey Stare \| Flickr - Photo Sharing!

02-10-2011, 07:23 AM	#60
ogl Banned Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Sankt Peterburg Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 8,382	Originally posted by gazonk This guy over at Chris Willson's flickr Photostream is amazed to hear that you can't shoot portraits with nice bokeh with the 645D: Monkey Stare \| Flickr - Photo Sharing! +10 There is 67 to 645 adapter - Chris uses 105/2.4, by the way... A lot of portraits with D FA 645 55mm F2.8