[ogl]

Reliable source? Maybe, the successor is already available? Perhaps, one should just ask Truesense Imaging .
Hasselblad also seems to use the KAF-40000 ( H4D-40 ).

Pentax 645D is in stock too. Leica S2 is in stock too. Even K-r is in stock too.
Does this fact say that the sensors are still in production?

[froeschle]

Does this fact say that the sensors are still in production?

Neither does it proof that they (or their revised versions) are not.

Of course, if one is dealing with a new owner, it also helps if one states that one is looking for alternatives (e.g. from STMicroelectronics) .

Kodak sold the image sensor business to Platinum Equity in November 2011.
Products announced in November 2011 are already included in the webpage: Kodak Announces New CCDs, Interline CCD
So, data might be outdated by half a year at most.

The sensor of the M9 might be still in production: Shortage of Leica M9 sensors
The M Monochrom seems to also use a Platinum Equity sensor. It more or less just "replaced" a KAF-18500 in an M9 body.
So, even if new or revised products are available, maximal compatibility could be guaranteed.
If Platinum Equity wants to stay alive, it has to sell sensors.

Of course, there are also some rumors that the original sensors of the medium format cameras are being discontinued:
Sale of Kodak’s Sensor Business is Now Affecting Leica and Pentax, Leica S3 with new sensor at Photokina
Therefore, I asked for a reliable source.

[eddie1960]

Neither does it proof that they (or their revised versions) are not.

Of course, if one is dealing with a new owner, it also helps if one states that one is looking for alternatives (e.g. from STMicroelectronics) .

Kodak sold the image sensor business to Platinum Equity in November 2011.
Products announced in November 2011 are already included in the webpage: Kodak Announces New CCDs, Interline CCD
So, data might be outdated by half a year at most.

The sensor of the M9 might be still in production: Shortage of Leica M9 sensors
The M Monochrom seems to also use a Platinum Equity sensor. It more or less just "replaced" a KAF-18500 in an M9 body.
So, even if new or revised products are available, maximal compatibility could be guaranteed.
If Platinum Equity wants to stay alive, it has to sell sensors.

Of course, there are also some rumors that the original sensors of the medium format cameras are being discontinued:
Sale of Kodak’s Sensor Business is Now Affecting Leica and Pentax, Leica S3 with new sensor at Photokina
Therefore, I asked for a reliable source.

the kodak web page dates to the same time as the sale. the new web page still says under development so there is no reliable current info. the leica rumours link is about as reliable as it would get.

[Mistral75]

What company will make the sensors now? Does Sony make sensors this big?

TrueSense Imaging (formerly the Image Sensor Solutions division of Eastman Kodak) and Teledyne Dalsa are the two companies designing and manufacturing sensors for medium format DSLRs and backs. Sony is not known to be manufacturing such sensors.

[recando]

I would prefer a MF Pentax without optical viewfinder to one [like the 645D] without live view.

I have no need for live view. If i get a evf with 16 MP in a perfect quality we can talk abuot it but until then it is just a toy.
The spirit of slr is full control.

[civiletti]

I have no need for live view. If i get a evf with 16 MP in a perfect quality we can talk abuot it but until then it is just a toy.
The spirit of slr is full control.

I do not need an evf either. Live view is sufficient for my needs.

[froeschle]

Re: Still in production?

Update: Truesense Imaging homepage (last document update - July 16, 2012):

KAF-40000
KAF-50100

[ElJamoquio]

K-r replacement
Mid-range APS-C (K200D replacement?)

Surely we can omit one of these in favor of the K-30...

[ElJamoquio]

Next generation 645D must support live view. It must also have considerable IQ advantage over the D800 or almost no one will pay the premium for medium format.

A 55x41 mm sensor (full frame 645D) would destroy 36x24 resolution capability.

But who would pay for that sensor and associated camera? Or rather, could Pentax bring together an attractive package for certain photographers?

[Cannikin]

Surely we can omit one of these in favor of the K-30...

Might want to check those dates again. This post was made several weeks before the K-30 was announced or even rumored.

[RonHendriks1966]

A 55x41 mm sensor (full frame 645D) would destroy 36x24 resolution capability.

But who would pay for that sensor and associated camera? Or rather, could Pentax bring together an attractive package for certain photographers?

well that would be asking a lot. I guess that if the sensor isn't the same size, but a cmos 44x33mm then it would grow to 48x36mm at the most.

[ElJamoquio]

well that would be asking a lot. I guess that if the sensor isn't the same size, but a cmos 44x33mm then it would grow to 48x36mm at the most.

Yes, it is asking a lot. I guess the 645 market could continue to cater to those already heavily invested in MF. If Pentax wants to grow the brand they're going to need to have some value over 36x24mm and right now the 44x33, especially with older sensor technology, isn't doing a good job. Heck, right now the 645 can't go above 1600 ISO, it's equalled by the D800 in SNR (even with a bigger sensor for the 645D), and the D800 exceeds it in every dynamic range, etc... and of course you can use the D800 for things that move, too (give me a bit of literary license here).

In terms of lenses, it's a mixed bag. Good, older lenses are cheap for MF, but they're cheap for Nikon FF, too. New MF lenses are gawd-awful expensive.

As the market stands right now (without a replacement) the only reason to purchase a 645 is if I already had some lenses/setup for MF, and had no need to do sports/wildlife photography. That's a pretty small market.

The biggest advantage of 645 (film) was that it was 2.68x the area of 135/D800. Right now the 645D is 1.6-something times the area of the D800. That just isn't enough to justify a much larger, much more expensive, and much less flexible system for (I think) most people.

So they could embiggen the sensor, or they could make things smaller (seems unlikely) or less compromised (seems very likely) or 70% less expensive (seems unlikely).

We'll see what they chose. If they chose poorly the 645D II could be the last of the 645D's.

[ogl]

A 55x41 mm sensor (full frame 645D) would destroy 36x24 resolution capability.

But who would pay for that sensor and associated camera? Or rather, could Pentax bring together an attractive package for certain photographers?

The technology of sensor production is rather high now. Even 48*36 mm sensor with any new techology with 60-80 MP razes D800E to the ground.
I've compared RAW files of D800E and 645D from imaging-resours myself. 645D is still better in terms of resolution and details. But the difference is rather low.
Anyway,
I think that Pentax will produce new 645DII with higher MP and old 645D will stay as unexpensive MF digital camera with lower price than now.

[Smolk]

old 645D will stay as unexpensive MF digital camera with lower price than now.

How can the old version stay when the sensor is not available any longer?
(Much as I hope it is true, would be good for me)

[slackercruster]

Not exactly.

It's also about sensor size.

Which is why if one had a camera phone with a 40mp sensor, then a non full frame of the same, then a full frame, then even a mediium format - naturally the medium format wins every time. Think of how the Kodak disc cameras were a fassive fail; it wasn't the film - it was the miniscule size of the sensor - incapable of even a qualty 8x10

Yes, that is right. For a FF to = the 645D it must be in thre 68 to 70 mp range.