Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
03-04-2016, 07:59 AM - 1 Like   #736
Pentaxian
D1N0's Avatar

Join Date: May 2012
Location: ---
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,621
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   #737
Site Supporter




Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Texas
Posts: 120
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   #738
Pentaxian
D1N0's Avatar

Join Date: May 2012
Location: ---
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,621
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   #739
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Tromsų, Norway
Photos: Albums
Posts: 922
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   #740
Pentaxian
Mistral75's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Paris
Posts: 2,781
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   #741
Loyal Site Supporter
clackers's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Melbourne
Photos: Albums
Posts: 7,737
Thanks for explaining, Mistral!
03-05-2016, 02:26 AM - 1 Like   #742
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 4,558
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   #743
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Southern Indiana
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 14,963
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   #744
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Tromsų, Norway
Photos: Albums
Posts: 922
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)
03-05-2016, 05:28 AM   #745
Pentaxian
D1N0's Avatar

Join Date: May 2012
Location: ---
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,621
The 645z doesn't need pixelshift for it's sharpness. And a bigger sensor means you can shoot at another perspective. It gives you a more intimate shot like you are not viewing from a distance but are present in the shot. 50mm becomes wide angle. Which is why ricoh should make a 44*33 GR.
03-05-2016, 05:32 AM   #746
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Southern Indiana
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 14,963
QuoteOriginally posted by Simen1 Quote
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)
It is really tough to compare the 645D to current full frame cameras. The 645D was released in 2010 meaning that it is ancient with regard to its sensor and its specifications. In a way it would be like bringing up the D700 and saying that it is hard to see what people see in full frame. The question is whether current gen medium format sensors and cameras have something to offer versus current gen full frame sensors and cameras and I think the answer is still a qualified yes.

In the end, it really is about the glass and medium format glass does render exceptionally well and seems to be a notch above most full frame glass (of course it should be for the price).
03-06-2016, 01:33 AM   #747
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Tromsų, Norway
Photos: Albums
Posts: 922
@D1N0: Yes, in some cases (like studio) its an advatage that 645Z don't need pixel shift to reach its level of sharpness. In other situations where pixel shift is usable, its not longer an advantage over K-1, but more or less equal.

No, a bigger sensor don’t mean you can shoot in another perspective. You select perspective by selecting lenses.

Rondec: I haven’t seen ISO and DR comparizons between 645D and modern FF cameras, but since it had CCD and other 33x44 CCD cameras show they was behind FF cameras on both DR and ISO in 2010 I suspect also the 645D is somewhat in the same area. I cant be sure, but I suspect. Going over to the CMOS sensor in 645Z its far better then its older CCD predecessor, and according to the DXO withdrawn results somewhat better then Sonys best FF cameras. But the difference isn’t large enough to compensate for the much larger apertures available in FF lenses. So a photograper wanting less noise would be better of using a Sony FF with f/1,4 and ISO 400 in stead of a 645Z with F/2,8 and ISO 1600 and the same shutter speed. 645Z doesn’t have a 2 stop advantage.
03-06-2016, 02:42 AM   #748
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Near Vienna, Austria
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 664
QuoteOriginally posted by Simen1 Quote
So a photograper wanting less noise would be better of using a Sony FF with f/1,4 and ISO 400 in stead of a 645Z with F/2,8 and ISO 1600 and the same shutter speed. 645Z doesn’t have a 2 stop advantage.
In theory perhaps yes. But I assume those who choose to haul around a 645Z do so for a reason and not just out of stupidity.
03-06-2016, 03:21 AM   #749
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Tromsų, Norway
Photos: Albums
Posts: 922
Sure, me too. Thats why I'm asking someone to elaborate the reasons I struggle to see myself. I already started to learn some of those reasons: high resolution single exposures of moving subjects, and lens sharpness.
03-06-2016, 03:29 AM   #750
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 4,558
I don't think people that choose MF do it for the noise handling. The application were high iso is legitimate like birding/wildlife/sport/nightclub are not occasions were MF are used that much. Likely because they miss the fast AF lenses and fast AF system in body. Likely because also the lenses that would provide the reach would be huge. Imagine if you need a 1200mm lens... Not practical.

It seems to me that MF is more used for studio, fashion, advertisement, landscapes, picture of antiquities and art... So at base iso most of the time.

The equivalency of focal length and deph of field is a simplification. The deph of field is always the same for a given focal length and focus distance regardless of the system, but a larger format will use another focal length and narrower appertures. And that change the rendering. It change the background blur and bokeh and it change the in focus / out of focus transition.

One could say a good share of the interrest to go for a larger format is the ability to use longer focal length and still keep a wide field of view.

This is not really about dynamic range, this is not at all about isos. The goal is not to try to salvage a picture with too much noise or to salvage a picture with harsh light. Photography is not really about that and if anything canon being worldwide leader with sensor that have less impressive figure should give an hint of that.

This is not neither about extremely shallow deph of field. Many fashion and studio shoot have quite some deph, the background is usually perfectly controlled and so there no need to use this trick of large apperture neither to shoot in low light or to avoid the distraction from background.

This is also that anyway if you do high end work for a very high price, the price of the gear, even an MF phase-one and the lenses are just a detail. After all, this is still less money than what a taxi need in France to work and far less than most shops incure at a cost for renting their brick and mortar store.

But it make no sense of course for somebody that is not rich and don't make a living out of that. There no more reason to buy an MF digital if you just take few pictures while on vacations and at Christmass than to rent a store in the center of the city if you sell 2-3 used things a year on ebay. And well even as a pro photographer I got that many "pro" don't make much money, arround 25K$ a year and they have to find a flat for themselve, buy food and whatever. There no much money to spend on high end gear. But not everybody in that sitatuion. Some photographers make more than 100K$/year and here spending 30K$ every 5-10 years seems very reasonnable.
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 08:07 PM. | See also: NikonForums.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