[Sandy Hancock]

How many would consider buying a 20k+ USD 645 DSLR to mainly be supported with second hand lenses as most are no longer manufactured?

This is just a wild guess, but perhaps those who already own a 645D or 645Z and a bunch of lenses, and are keen to upgrade to "proper" medium format?

[Mistral75]

ok, I'm late to the party (pitty party??) I've read that in about every Pentax FB group but as it's been pointed out, Ricoh hasn't announced it nor marked it as discontinued... yet. Keep the dream alive!!!

As it's been pointed out (in this very thread, on top of page 2), they have.

Ricoh Imaging Store clearly says that 645z is "out of production" in the description of the camera, and it's currently "out of stock" (see attached). They may or may not find some here and there in the future, but that's it. No new production.

[MMVIII]

Beside Hasselblad ending the H-System also Zeiss seems to exit photography market completely. link https://www.thephoblographer.com/2023/06/05/reports-confirm-that-zeiss-has-e...hoto-industry/
I think it's tough times for traditional photo companies and we should all be grateful Ricoh is so much dedicated to this product line that it still supports the APS-C line and most probably works on the FF-DSLRs. Many of the recent high end-products for shure have not paid off yet, and lenses like DFA 21 limited very much require and determine a new FF-body. But I honestly can't see this for MF.

[zapp]

The next couple months will be interesting. You don´t announce end of production without a replacement in any direction. Best guess is that 645 is dead.
I hope to see where the efforts really go to now in physical products - most likely k-mount, fullframe... new glass would be nice. The shift to k-mount was communicated before, but let's see more products after K3iii. Clearing a lot of old gear is good, but the message to the customer only works if you can offer something instead, i.e. K1iii, the DFA 35ish lens, ... for a start.

[ffking]

All this time I've been holding out for a red one...

[nonpigliounoshoot]

Let's give credit where credit is due: you're quoting, almost verbatim, fellow Pentaxian @JPT.

Pentax Interview in Cameraman Magazine from Late 2022 - PentaxForums.com

true you are right. I forgot the source and related discussion. I apologize.

[Jonathan Mac]

The K-3 II was discontinued long before the K-3 III appeared, though that was mostly because Pentax thought that with the K-1 around no-one would want a flagship APS-C any more.

Honestly I'm not sure if there's enough of a DSLR segment left in the MF market. I've seen on this forum that the majority of those who shot (and frequently posted) with the 645Z have moved to Fujifilm MF mirrorless. I'd like to see a successor to the Z but I'm not confident it wouldn't sink in today's market.

[Serkevan]

This is just a wild guess, but perhaps those who already own a 645D or 645Z and a bunch of lenses, and are keen to upgrade to "proper" medium format?

A 20K body would be more expensive than a 645Z with 4 or 5 lenses... not sure there are *that* many people willing to drop such a massive amount of money. To put it in perspective, I'd be able to pay rent and utilities for over three years lol.

[biz-engineer]

All non current cameras that were assembled in the Philippines will eventually be discontinued, if the low rate of production is not worth the cost of transferring production in Vietnam.

[zapp]

The K-3 II was discontinued long before the K-3 III appeared, though that was mostly because Pentax thought that with the K-1 around no-one would want a flagship APS-C any more.

Honestly I'm not sure if there's enough of a DSLR segment left in the MF market. I've seen on this forum that the majority of those who shot (and frequently posted) with the 645Z have moved to Fujifilm MF mirrorless. I'd like to see a successor to the Z but I'm not confident it wouldn't sink in today's market.

But APS-C was more than the K-3ii while FF is only the K1(ii) and 645 was also only a single camera.

[biz-engineer]

A 20K body would be more expensive than a 645Z with 4 or 5 lenses... not sure there are *that* many people willing to drop such a massive amount of money. To put it in perspective, I'd be able to pay rent and utilities for over three years lol.

Some people can afford, although Ricoh doesn't have the kind of marketing and target customers like Phase One. If you look at Phase One, they are almost unknown to consumer camera websites and forums, except via Capture One. Phase One to customer relationship is more like company to company, or one on one. When you buy a Phase One system, you are directly in touch with Phase One staff, they are able to tailor the system to each customer, Phase One organizes meetings with customers. Phase One vs Canon is like Caterpillar vs Volkswagen. Volkswagen customers may argue in online forums that no one needs an excavator for growing two square meters of strawberries and flowers in your garden, which is true.

[Sandy Hancock]

A 20K body would be more expensive than a 645Z with 4 or 5 lenses... not sure there are *that* many people willing to drop such a massive amount of money. To put it in perspective, I'd be able to pay rent and utilities for over three years lol.

I have no argument with any of that. It will put medium format back in the hands of working professionals and cashed up enthusiasts, which quite frankly is where it belongs.

The only reason I built up a 645 kit is because it became (kind of) affordable. With the wisdom of hindsight, I should have stuck with K-mount.

[Serkevan]

I have no argument with any of that. It will put medium format back in the hands of working professionals and cashed up enthusiasts, which quite frankly is where it belongs.

The only reason I built up a 645 kit is because it became (kind of) affordable. With the wisdom of hindsight, I should have stuck with K-mount.

Certainly - but that's why I don't think they will do it. It's only for a very specific subset of pro and a tiny niche of enthusiast with bags of money to burn... and starting a system more or less from scratch (with the obvious caveats of having older FA 645 lenses available) would be a tough sell to that kind of person, since they've had a very long time to build up their systems with Phase One or Hassy.

[reh321]

I have no argument with any of that. It will put medium format back in the hands of working professionals and cashed up enthusiasts, which quite frankly is where it belongs.

As I’ve already said, when I was young {75 years ago!}, every time I saw a professional photographer, s/he was using a medium format camera. The first time I saw a digital camera, it was in the hands of a professional photographer, because they really benefit by it {no ‘proof prints’ per se, instant access in general, etc}, and every professional photographer I’ve seen in recent years has been using a digital {35mm} camera. The time for medium format has essentially past - I believe the biggest hope for it is to go back to film, but professionals would lose too much by that.

[James O'Neill]

My own, business-naive assessment is that in the modern era, crop medium format (44 x 33) is not sufficiently bigger than "full frame" (36 x 24) to be worth pursuing. To give medium format a proper point of difference, I reckon Pentax should seriously consider using a film-sized 56 x 42 (ish) sensor in any 645Z replacement, giving it roughly the same crop factor vs "full frame" as the latter has vs APS-C.

For the person starting from a clean sheet - or upgrading from APS-C but changing lens mount there is question of what is enough. FF, 44x33, or more. Some 645 owners are Pentax loyalists who have come from K-mount, others found the 645D or 645Z met their needs well at the time. There is certainly an issue that a crop sensor (which 44x33 is in a 60x45 body) discards some of the information from the lens and only digitizes about 1/2 the area (APS-C with a 35mm film mirror box and lens only does 4/9ths). So digitizing more image would give more... But there is the trade off with sensor price - a 53x40 sensor would be significantly more expensive.

How many would consider buying a 20k+ USD 645 DSLR to mainly be supported with second hand lenses as most are no longer manufactured?

When the 645D and Z were released they were a lot cheaper than the comparable Hasselblad because they used a lot of common parts from existing SLRs, it is really a question of how much does the sensor cost. I don't think there is any reason why Ricoh couldn't make a camera with the 100MP sensor found in the fuji GFX at a similar price point ($7500) In my head that is $5000-6000 of sensor and $1500-2500 rest of the camera. Given that price of the chip goes up even faster than the chip area the sensor being $10-15K part is not impossible.

This is just a wild guess, but perhaps those who already own a 645D or 645Z and a bunch of lenses, and are keen to upgrade to "proper" medium format?

I think Ricoh could take a 645Z chassis with minimal mods, fit the K3-iii motherboard, and the sensor du jour from Sony and produce another 645 without massive development.
Accountants will tell them 645 lenses in the warehouse may never sell so their inventory value is zero and any sales of lenses with a book value of zero now are all profit (undoing past losses when they were written down to zero). If they can sell to new-to-Pentax-645 owners who buy lenses that's a lot more margin-per-user. Then they need to weigh up profitability of $15-20K camera with a 53x40 sensor vs a $5-7.5K camera with a 33x44 (if either can cover their costs)
Catch 22 is would someone buying a camera where the sensor alone costs them into 5 figures, buy one that has had little development, or demand that the rest of the body, and their lenses must be state of the art. So the camera they could make might not be sellable. If it has taken this long to clear 645Zs out of the warehouse, and 15 year old 645 lenses are still on the shelves, any new 645 has to be seen as a low volume product (which can be OK) but possibly the development needed to sell even small volumes is too great - I'd prefer that to go into a K1-iii (but I'm biased).