Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
04-03-2009, 10:34 AM   #16
Pentaxian
thibs's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Belgium
Photos: Albums
Posts: 5,160
Frankly the Pentax is OK if not nice, the other look like cheap Canon DSLRs: toys 'out of Star Wars' wannabe. In fact they look ridiculous.

04-03-2009, 11:29 AM   #17
Pentaxian
ryan s's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Madison, WI
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,370
The 645D looks very comfortable to use (no sharp corners) not to mention its ergonmics should make it easy to use for anyone who would also use a Pentax DSLR as a backup.

I like it.
04-03-2009, 02:13 PM   #18
Pentaxian
fs999's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Luxembourg
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,450
QuoteOriginally posted by elkarrde Quote
the shape is very 645-like, it follows all medium format design patterns.

think about pentax 645N film camera - 645D looks like modernized film camera, and i find it way better than reinventing the wheel.

i like it!
You showed the old prototype...



This is the last design :



04-03-2009, 03:40 PM   #19
Veteran Member




Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Lithuania
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 490
Original Poster
Thanks people for your opinions and presentation of interesting pictures, links and information.. i also was confused, that earlier was posted a not the latest design.. but now, things are clear..
but, not much has changed, what do I like more in the last, is the style of brand name Pentax, the earlier looked weird..

04-04-2009, 01:46 PM   #20
Forum Member




Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 50
The reason the S2 is smaller and more like a FF DSLR is because they designed a new mount for the system. Therefor the mirror can be smaller. The bulky design Pentax has presented is actually smaller and more attractive than the other camera's in its class. Keep in mind that the camera is not meant to be used walking around on the street or just snapping pictures here and there. You must be intending to use it in a studio and usually on a tripod, the pros shooting with these cameras rarely miss, they might take 20 shots in a shoot that you or I would take 200 in. Also if the design of the camera is effecting your model, then I suggest hiring a new model.

I do think it would have been interesting to have seen an MF body with full time live view so as to eliminate the need for the large mirror box. Tremendous quality in a smaller camera, but that would push to many pros away.

All that aside the camera looks comfortable ergonomically, considering how often you would hand hold it. From an industrial design perspective the front where it says Pentax it kind of looks a bit odd, but I am not sure how much they can really do with that. Honestly though not a single person buying this camera is going to think twice about anything other than its performance.
04-04-2009, 01:58 PM   #21
Pentaxian
Pål Jensen's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Norway
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,064
The 645D is indeed compact by professional DSLR standards. It is about the same size (or more correctly, volume) as a K20D with the battery grip. It compares favourably with the pro offerings from Nikon and Canon and is just as portable and hand hold able. The lenses are about the size of canon L lenses...
04-17-2009, 02:02 AM   #22
Zou
Junior Member




Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Edinburgh
Posts: 38
QuoteOriginally posted by Elton Quote
Totally agree! The Pentax is the most professional looking by my terms, I do not understand why Hasselblad while making the most expensive and advanced digital medium formats today choose to design them as ugly sci fi toys? But by far the ugliest 645s are the Mamiyas. Which is a mystery to me as their 67 cameras are all fantastic.

The one negative side of the 645D is that it apparently cannot change backs, which means you have to buy a completely new camera in the future to upgrade, then again - it might not be the biggest problem...
A good part of the reason for the 'ugliness' is that ability to change backs. The finder needs to provide clearance for a range of digital and film backs, and being AF cannot get by with a WLF like the 67s . Pentax can give a cleaner look because it doesn't have that flexibility.
04-17-2009, 03:45 AM   #23
Pentaxian
Pål Jensen's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Norway
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,064
QuoteOriginally posted by Zou Quote
A good part of the reason for the 'ugliness' is that ability to change backs. The finder needs to provide clearance for a range of digital and film backs, and being AF cannot get by with a WLF like the 67s . Pentax can give a cleaner look because it doesn't have that flexibility.

Actually, the boxy shape of the 645's is due to how the film and film transport is oriented in the camera - up/dowm. The Pentax 645's doesn't have interchangeable backs.

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!
pentax 645d, pentax news, pentax rumors, shape
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Pentax 645D Adam Pentax Medium Format 1 03-31-2011 07:56 PM
Pentax 645D, who wants one... Buddha Jones Pentax News and Rumors 106 01-17-2011 03:20 AM
Pentax 645D benjikan Pentax DSLR Discussion 17 04-29-2010 07:08 AM
News The Pentax 645D is here! Adam Site Suggestions and Help 28 04-21-2010 08:20 AM
Pentax 645D Psynema Pentax DSLR Discussion 2 11-05-2009 09:59 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:01 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