[Kunzite]

The people making those videos are incompetent; they can't even read and reproduce a spec sheet. Failing the "read and reproduce" test, I'm not surprised they're attempting to compare such different cameras, by merely quoting some randomly selected specs.

Na Horuk, isn't the 645D already "affordable", at ~4600 euro?
As for the "cult status", I think the 645Z is in a better position - and even so, only in selected circles. There is much talk about it on the LuLa forum, with people either being amazed at what Pentax/Ricoh could do for such a low price, or finding reasons why (their?) low-tech expensive backs are still better

---

Last edited by Kunzite; 04-17-2014 at 01:28 PM.

[Parallax]

, by merely quoting some randomly selected specs.

The science can always be tailored to support the conjecture.

[monochrome]

Uggh, don't watch that video, much of the info is incorrect. We don't need to promote that YouTube channel.

---------- Post added 04-17-14 at 04:13 PM ----------

And it's beyond me, why anyone would seriously need to compare these totally different cameras.

Consider the source Poster.

[monochrome]

I'm reading a dense international-finance book, and the currency exchange part -- their 'equivalence' -- really goes round and round. Seems like gold is the base point, with all the dollars and euros and yen being pumped up and down against it, for all the best of reasons, and some that aren't. But our photography is even more complicated

Hah Hah - try evaluating comparative GDP's in PPP* terms over historical time periods to discover correlations and covariances. Use the 90-Day UST Yield as ~K, adjusted quarterly.


*Purchasing Power Parity

[Cannikin]

I know I'm gonna regret addressing this post, but...

Lets say the 645Z is a full frame sensor. After all, you can't be bigger than Full. Full means Full, honestly, in English you can't be more full, you're full, or you aren't.. so a 35mm image is a 1:1.5 crop and an APS-c is a 1:2 crop. Personally I'm not looking at any calculations that don't adhere to this standard. It's time for the English language to re-assert itself.

If you were a real engineer, a real photographer or a real anything you'd know that. NO, there is no where in the real universe where a Carl Zies 100 Makro Planar on my K-3 is in any way equivalent to my Vivitar 135 on an FF

For someone who talks so much about being a "real engineer" or whatever, you could at least get elementary arithmetic right. Hint: the "crop factor" from 645Z to 35mm is not 1.5. Neither is the crop factor from 35mm to APS-C 135/100. If you're going to throw around insults to people's intelligence, it helps not to pull numbers out of thin air.

You don't need to know about lenses you don't have, and you can evaluate a lens by looking through your viewfinder, with the lens on the camera.

Care to explain what this means? Does that first clause mean the lens industry is dead because no one needs to buy any lenses they don't have? Or is it "be happy with what you have"? What about people with just the kit lens? What about people with no lens? Does that second clause imply that everyone has every lens and camera they could possibly want at their disposal to evaluate in person through the viewfinder at will? You talk about not being in this universe, yet your statements sure are outlandish.

No, equivalency doesn't tell the whole picture, I never claimed it does, and anyone who does claim so doesn't know what they're talking about. However, it is a tool that one can use as a starting point to getting the lenses/system you want or need.

Several months ago, I thought: "I like the angle of view of my DA 21 Limited, but I sure would like a faster lens with shallower depth of field like the pictures I've seen of the RX1 with its 35mm f/2 lens and 35mm sensor". And so I bought the Voigtlander 17.5mm f/0.95 for my m4/3 setup without ever having access to the lens in person. And it did exactly what I predicted it would do through equivalence calculations: give me an AOV similar to my DA 21, and shallow DOF like the RX1. Funny how that works. It is now my favorite lens to use, and lives on my camera. No, I did not care about test results claiming soft corners or whatnot, such things are not relevant to how I wanted to use the lens. The stuff I determined by using equivalency principles did. I have other lenses for which I bought based on edge-to-edge sharpness. Besides AOV, no, I do not care about "aperture equivalence" for those lenses, as that's not relevant for what I wanted out of them.

"Equivalence" is a tool for you to work with, just as controlled tests are, just as sample photos are, just as your current first-hand knowledge of lenses is. None of these tell a "whole picture" (no, not even sample photos because you were not at the scene, so you don't know how well the lens captured what you would look for in it). Use them as you will, or not if they are not relevant in your decision. Insulting people who do use these tools, just because you don't, is very immature.

EDIT: typo, there is no "DA 23", heh.

[thibs]

FWIW everything should be equivalent to 6x7.

C'mon, it should be 6x6



...


Just be sure it messes up any equivallency blabla because it squared format and it really doesn't make any sense anymore...

[jon404]

@monochrome -- re 'evaluating comparative GDP's in PPP* terms over historical time periods, etc...' so look: if you bring your financial insight to bear on this thread... are we looking at more inflation in the near future (BUY that new 645Z as a hedge!) ...or... in spite of the best, most creative money-printing efforts of both Fed and Treasury... are we actually in a smoldering long-term deflationary period? (buy that 645Z for the fun of it, but don't expect it to go up in dollar value).

Interest rates are so low right now... I wish Ricoh had in-house financing so we could all run out and charge up one of these new cameras!

And -- a photo-financial equivalency baseline -- 6.5 -- Being the number of ounces of gold it takes to buy a 645Z.

---

Last edited by jon404; 04-17-2014 at 04:29 PM.

[Uluru]

Question: will the old film-645 lenses still deliver sharp photos on the new 50 MP 645Z? Isn't there something about how lenses have to get better to keep up with the new, larger sensors?

All FA 645 lenses can out-resolve even 150 MP sensors.
We may say current 645 lenses will last forever.
That is the beauty of the MF — MF lenses simply rock and deliver that extraordinary look and feel to images. You may try to mimic a faint flavour of that look by mounting a 645 lens onto your K-3 and playing with PP a little.

Or a different scenario: one may buy a D800 and that 55mm Otus lens from Zeiss for same money as 645Z with a 55mm lens. Which one would you choose? I'd choose latter any time.

[monochrome]

in spite of the best, most creative money-printing efforts of both Fed and Treasury... are we actually in a smoldering long-term deflationary period?

All things pass given time.

Gold is the best reference currency. An ounce of gold, over time, always buys 300 pounds of bread (not the stuff in the plastic wrapper at Safeway) if you smooth out the speculative peaks and troughs. That's all a reference medium of exchange is used for - some constant that is one step beyond transactional bartering.

PM Sent about Inflation and Deflation to avoid a thread jack.

To answer your question, Screw It. Just buy the camera. But don't borrow the money.

[WerTicus]

A second hand 645 should be getting down to new D800 prices by then, don't you think?

Yeah, but I would take a d800 over a 645d. I have shot both Plus the d800 is 2.5k used now.

[mee]

Yeah, but I would take a d800 over a 645d. I have shot both Plus the d800 is 2.5k used now.

Me too. Much more functionality at less cost overall.

[bossa]

https://fbcdn-sphotos-b-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-prn1/t31.0-8/1974066_73650...28302720_o.jpg

[WerTicus]

P MODE!!!! grrrr

[Cynog Ap Brychan]

P MODE!!!! grrrr

Why not? It is a K-3 on steroids, after all

[clackers]

Why not? It is a K-3 on steroids, after all

The FF crowd must be loving this, like watching railroads slowly being built by two companies, one from Upper K3 Station, the other from Downtown 645, meeting one day at a bit of empty dirt called FF Junction.