[JimmyDranox]

From that moment when Ricoh starts his PR campaign comparing 645z with a FF, I'm still wondering if they are really thinking this. Because if they do, that means, IMO, that they don't have a clue about photography. And that's why:

Can a 645z be used for landscape and studio work. Yes, is the best.

Can a 654z be used for sports? I don't think so. For birding? Not so much. For macro? Hardly. (I don't imagine how it is to follow a bee with a 645z, and keep the camera steady enough to gain a little depth of field). For astronomy?, At a half of this price, or less, anybody can buy a good dedicated astro camera. Can be used for social event, weddings, concerts, and so on, where very fast lenses are needed? No.

Can all this things be done with a FF camera? Yes. For a third, or a quarter of this price. Must I say something about the prices of 645 lenses? I think there is no need.

I like 645z. Yes, is a wonderful camera. But I, like 99% of us, don't have the money for such a system, plus another system for those photography fields which cannot be covered by 645. So, I think that presenting 645z as a FF replacement is misleading.

---

Last edited by JimmyDranox; 08-22-2014 at 11:16 AM.

[Na Horuk]

Can all this things be done with a FF camera? Yes. For a third, or a quarter of this price.

But for birding and macro APSC has an advantage and its even cheaper, so why bother with silly FF?
The 645 is meant for those photographers, who want the difference. Especially for landscapes and nature photos, since it is WR. And if you look at MF landscape and nature photos, they are stunning

[Tanzer]

I'm hoping, for Ricoh's sake, that they can find a way to hold on to the MF sector. It would be a shame if photographers suddenly "discover" MF as prices come down, only to go with some other manufacturer's offering, whatever that may be. I suspect some revisionist marketing manager at Canon or Nikon is already looking for some way to claim "world's first (mainstream) medium format digital camera" in another 5 to 10 years.

Maybe the better question is, what can Pentax do to maintain its lead in MF, and get more folks to jump into it, who would otherwise never leave their trusted Canons/Nikons? Or, why do I not feel like there is much of a compelling upgrade path for me to go to a 645D/Z from my APS_C K-5? This is a rhetorical question -- I know everyone wants lower prices, but I'm talking about a more complete ecosystem, a bigger picture. There seems to be a clear message for Canikon mid-level users that to go "pro", all you have to do is buy their FF cameras and/or a few more FF lenses, and you can make a gradual transition. There is nothing significant that I own today that will ease/encourage a transition to a 645, other than my AF540FGZ flash, and even that is pretty dubious rationale.

[infoomatic]

From that moment when Ricoh starts his PR campaign comparing 645z with a FF, I'm still wondering if they are really thinking this. Because if they do, that means, IMO, that they don't have a clue about photography. And that's why:

Can a 645z be used for landscape and studio work. Yes, is the best.

Can a 654z be used for sports? I don't think so. For birding? Not so much. For macro? Hardly. (I don't imagine how it is to follow a bee with a 645z, and keep the camera steady enough to gain a little depth of field). For astronomy?, At a half of this price, or less, anybody can buy a good dedicated astro camera. Can be used for social event, weddings, concerts, and so on, where very fast lenses are needed? No.

Can all this things be done with a FF camera? Yes. For a third, or a quarter of this price. Must I say something about the prices of 645 lenses? I think there is no need.

I like 645z. Yes, is a wonderful camera. But I, like 99% of us, don't have the money for such a system, plus another system for those photography fields which cannot be covered by 645. So, I think that presenting 645z as a FF replacement is misleading.

+1 ... nothing to add really.

Being heavily invested in K-Mount system is of absolutely no advantage when switching to larger sensor systems at the moment (be it Nikon FF or Pentax MF) ... so a Pentax FF would be quite appealing for those having FF lenses ready

[Tanzer]

Maybe in some parallel universe, Ricoh is developing a mirrorless 645 body with a flange adapter that will allow Canikon users to jump over and bring their glass over with them. Yeah I know that Sony has the A7/r/s, along with their own E-to-A mount adapter for native A-mount lenses. But the difference here is this body would be a gateway drug to purchasing 645 lenses on the awesome MF sensor. And in this imaginary world, the body would actually not be mirrorless (I just said that to convey the idea), rather it would have some kind of new tech mirror that would work when the real 645 lenses were in use, but stay out of the way when other lenses were in use. (Maybe some alternate adapter and smaller mirror for the K-mount faithful.) That would be enough to encourage people to go for the native 645 lenses.

I'm sure Sony is already planning for a mirrorless MF, there is no downside for them and they are not afraid to show they are willing to assimilate anyone's lens collection including 645. So the trick here is to offer a body that works better with 645 lenses (and maybe K-mount lenses) which, with the option of trusted phase detection and AF, Pentax would be in a unique position to offer.

Sorry for my threadjacking rant. Everyone ignores my posts anyway.

[formercanuck]

The 645 is meant for those photographers, who want the difference. Especially for landscapes and nature photos, since it is WR. And if you look at MF landscape and nature photos, they are stunning

I agree - Those who want it, and are willing to pay for it.

I'm hoping, for Ricoh's sake, that they can find a way to hold on to the MF sector. It would be a shame if photographers suddenly "discover" MF as prices come down, only to go with some other manufacturer's offering, whatever that may be. I suspect some revisionist marketing manager at Canon or Nikon is already looking for some way to claim "world's first (mainstream) medium format digital camera" in another 5 to 10 years.

Maybe the better question is, what can Pentax do to maintain its lead in MF, and get more folks to jump into it, who would otherwise never leave their trusted Canons/Nikons? Or, why do I not feel like there is much of a compelling upgrade path for me to go to a 645D/Z from my APS_C K-5? This is a rhetorical question -- I know everyone wants lower prices, but I'm talking about a more complete ecosystem, a bigger picture. There seems to be a clear message for Canikon mid-level users that to go "pro", all you have to do is buy their FF cameras and/or a few more FF lenses, and you can make a gradual transition. There is nothing significant that I own today that will ease/encourage a transition to a 645, other than my AF540FGZ flash, and even that is pretty dubious rationale.

This is probably just me speaking... but Canon/Nikon would have to go and invest in MF glass/mount (not impossible), and have a reason to push their flagships of the FF to the side for MF. If you had a D800, would you seriously consider switching to a 645z - and why ? In general, as Na Horuk has pointed out, MF is primarily geared on landscape, fashion, studio work. It doesn't have high speed shutter, or high speed AF, as that's not what the market primarily needs. It needs (demands) high quality. Shooting sports - not exactly what a MF camera is intended to do. A Canon 5D mark II would be much better.

Can (will) someone make a mirrorless MF - hey - why not. That would be cool, and it will sell glass. Sony made a mirrorless FF.

[Poit]

The elephant in the room is price. A 645Z + 25 f/4 kit is $13,500 currently. Not really serving a volume market, and not something your typical aps-c shooter would even consider upgrading to - especially when their current K-mount lenses would be worthless on it.

A Pentax FF body would debut in the range of (probably) $1800 - $3500.

Pentax needs an affordable FF body if it wants K-mount to survive/thrive long term. MILC will get better & better and eat into the low-mid (and high) DSLR tiers, entry-FF will eat into the high-end aps-c == Pentax has a shrinking volume segment and their bread n' butter product (K-mount) is drained of lifeblood.

.

+1

You and I seem to agree on many things

[jogiba]

Maybe in some parallel universe, Ricoh is developing a mirrorless 645 body with a flange adapter that will allow Canikon users to jump over and bring their glass over with them. Yeah I know that Sony has the A7/r/s, along with their own E-to-A mount adapter for native A-mount lenses. But the difference here is this body would be a gateway drug to purchasing 645 lenses on the awesome MF sensor. And in this imaginary world, the body would actually not be mirrorless (I just said that to convey the idea), rather it would have some kind of new tech mirror that would work when the real 645 lenses were in use, but stay out of the way when other lenses were in use. (Maybe some alternate adapter and smaller mirror for the K-mount faithful.) That would be enough to encourage people to go for the native 645 lenses.

I'm sure Sony is already planning for a mirrorless MF, there is no downside for them and they are not afraid to show they are willing to assimilate anyone's lens collection including 645. So the trick here is to offer a body that works better with 645 lenses (and maybe K-mount lenses) which, with the option of trusted phase detection and AF, Pentax would be in a unique position to offer.

Sorry for my threadjacking rant. Everyone ignores my posts anyway.

Canikon users already use their glass on full frame mirrorless bodies today that cost a fraction of any medium format camera so I don't see a big market for this since their lenses are made to only cover a full frame sensor.