Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
03-04-2016, 03:54 AM   #721
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
clackers's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Melbourne
Photos: Albums
Posts: 11,230
QuoteOriginally posted by Zygonyx Quote
Which other limitations ?
Just have a look onto others MF manufacturers catalogues....
Aren't they limited to just 1/1600s or so? And limited in how wide their aperture can be?

03-04-2016, 04:06 AM   #722
Pentaxian
D1N0's Avatar

Join Date: May 2012
Location: ---
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 5,143
QuoteOriginally posted by gazonk Quote
They need to move to FF 645 ASAP
There now is a 100mp 645 FF cmos sensor(co-developed with Sony) in the phase one XF 100MP which costs $50000,- (a lens included ). Pentax will do that once these sensors can be put in a sub $10000 system.
03-04-2016, 04:22 AM   #723
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Tromsų, Norway
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,028
QuoteOriginally posted by rawr Quote
But bad news for 645Z sales.
QuoteOriginally posted by gazonk Quote
They need to move to FF 645 ASAP
My though too. And let the 645Z sensor pass on to the K-1 replacement, for those occasions the image circle is larger then FF. That actually happens quite often. The image circle varies with focal length, aperture and focus distance and its always the worst case combination of those factors that defines the lenses official max image circle. So if I can have a camera that in worst case only give me good FF images, and in other cases a varying degree of medium format, with K mount lenses, I would be very happy.

QuoteOriginally posted by D1N0 Quote
There now is a 100mp 645 FF cmos sensor(co-developed with Sony) in the phase one XF 100MP which costs $50000,- (a lens included ). Pentax will do that once these sensors can be put in a sub $10000 system.
The $40000 Phase one camera with the same sensor as 645Z show us that its not the sensor cost that dominates their prices. Using relative pricing as an indicator I think a full frame replacement for 645Z or addition to 645Z would add somewhere between $2000 and $6000.
03-04-2016, 05:07 AM   #724
Pentaxian
Zygonyx's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Ile de France
Posts: 3,247
QuoteOriginally posted by clackers Quote
Aren't they limited to just 1/1600s or so? And limited in how wide their aperture can be?
Yes, but we wouldn't need many of these.
At least one for portraits.
Same with Tilt shift : something like 30 mm f/4.5 would be fine...

03-04-2016, 05:20 AM   #725
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
clackers's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Melbourne
Photos: Albums
Posts: 11,230
QuoteOriginally posted by Zygonyx Quote
Yes, but we wouldn't need many of these.
At least one for portraits.
Same with Tilt shift : something like 30 mm f/4.5 would be fine...
Yes, I agree with you now, what can offering a couple of specialty lenses for a premium product hurt?
03-04-2016, 07:54 AM - 1 Like   #726
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Nelson B.C.
Posts: 3,475
Why is this bad for the 645Z? There have been full frame alternatives to the medium format for a while now, and the reasons to use the 645Z are still there. Nothing has changed except now there is a Pentax full frame available instead of having to go to Nikon or Sony.

What he is saying is that a Pentax shooter has a viable alternative to the 645Z for high IQ shooting.

The 645Z at $8k with $5k lenses is a pretty narrow niche. Someone in that market isn't looking to save a bit of money. Except in the comparison to the other MF stuff which is $20K+.

Does BMW lose sales of it's high end cars when they make their less expensive ones really nice? I suspect it is the opposite. The infrastructure to support the K1 geared to professionals will increase the 645Z value proposition, not decrease it.
03-04-2016, 07:59 AM - 1 Like   #727
Pentaxian
D1N0's Avatar

Join Date: May 2012
Location: ---
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 5,143
QuoteOriginally posted by derekkite Quote
Why is this bad for the 645Z?
It isn't really but it gives us something to argue about.
03-04-2016, 11:55 AM   #728
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Texas
Posts: 194
Can we argue about shipping?

Who all pre-ordered and had the patience to select free shipping, ie wait 4-7 days, versus same day/overnight/2nd day options? Will it be a race for the 1st unboxing video?

03-04-2016, 12:03 PM   #729
Pentaxian
D1N0's Avatar

Join Date: May 2012
Location: ---
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 5,143
QuoteOriginally posted by disasterfilm Quote
Can we argue about shipping?

Who all pre-ordered and had the patience to select free shipping, ie wait 4-7 days, versus same day/overnight/2nd day options? Will it be a race for the 1st unboxing video?
Just camp out in front of BHPhoto and be the first to get one en do the unboxing video right then and there.
03-04-2016, 03:52 PM   #730
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Tromsų, Norway
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,028
QuoteOriginally posted by derekkite Quote
Why is this bad for the 645Z? There have been full frame alternatives to the medium format for a while now, and the reasons to use the 645Z are still there.
I struggle to see those reasons. Can you please fill me in on that?
03-05-2016, 01:07 AM   #731
Pentaxian
Mistral75's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Paris
Posts: 3,500
QuoteOriginally posted by clackers Quote
Aren't they limited to just 1/1600s or so? And limited in how wide their aperture can be?
Yes for the maximum shutter speed but it can be overcome by having in-lens leaf shutter together with in-camera focal-plane shutter (e.g.: Phase One, Hasselblad 2000 series).

No for the aperture wideness; I presume you are confusing with the maximum shutter speed being linked to the aperture chosen (the wider the aperture, the lower the maximum shutter speed).
03-05-2016, 02:12 AM   #732
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
clackers's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Melbourne
Photos: Albums
Posts: 11,230
Thanks for explaining, Mistral!
03-05-2016, 02:26 AM - 1 Like   #733
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 4,857
QuoteOriginally posted by Simen1 Quote
I struggle to see those reasons. Can you please fill me in on that?
The same reason to get an FF instead of APSC, APSC over m4/3, m4/3 over 1", 1" over 1/1.7" and so on. As good or as bad.
03-05-2016, 04:02 AM   #734
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Gladys, Virginia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 18,365
QuoteOriginally posted by Simen1 Quote
I struggle to see those reasons. Can you please fill me in on that?
I think the two reasons that I can see are for better resolution and for better high iso. Well, and better dynamic range at a given iso (the D810 has the same base dynamic range as the 645Z, but it needs to use iso 50 to get there).

For pure landscape photographers or studio photographers who have the money, the 645Z will still give better results -- albeit at a high cost.
03-05-2016, 05:15 AM   #735
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Tromsų, Norway
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,028
For studio photographers then yes resolution is better with the 645 series. 40 or 51 Mp vs 36 Mp, and the 645 got sharper lenses, resulting in sharper images. Not by a huge amount but I'm sure it will be notable. Its a huge price premium for a relatively little gain in resolution.

For landscape photographers its a bit more tricky. In situations where pixel shift resolution is useful the K-1 probably produces comparable detail level to the 645Z. In other situations its still a (small) advantage for both digital 645 models.

For ISO and DR I'm not sure the 645D actually are less noisy and have higher DR then K-1. I guess 645Z have a small advantage on DR and a larger advantage on ISO. But the 645Z is generally limited to f/2,8 primes and f/4 zooms (or around those apertures). The K-1 might be fitted with 1-2 stops larger apertures and remove the noise advantage completely.

The K-1 would also be lighter to carry to the best landscape sites, and the photographer will be less dependent on a tripod both because of weight/size and SR.

All in all, I still struggle to see that the 645 system offers any significant advantages over K-1. Slightly better resolution in some cases yes, but I think few will rationally think that alone is worth the price difference and disadvantages following the change (losing SR, availability of faster lenses and so on)
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
auto, base, camera, company, compression, d810, design, dr, electrons, fa, hardware, iso, k-1, k-3, lenses, pentax, pentax body, pentax k-1, pentax news, pentax rumors, photos, pre-order, risk, sensor, specifications, timelapse, trip, vs
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Pentax K-3 II Officially Announced Adam Pentax News and Rumors 1015 07-03-2015 10:55 PM
Pentax K-S2 Officially Announced Adam Pentax K-S1 & K-S2 12 05-23-2015 06:49 AM
Pentax K-30 Officially Announced! Adam Pentax News and Rumors 245 09-12-2012 08:32 PM
Pentax K-5 Officially Announced Adam Pentax News and Rumors 533 03-06-2012 05:45 AM
K-5 Firmware 1.02 Officially Announced Ole Pentax K-5 50 01-20-2011 10:05 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:51 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top