Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
10-02-2014, 05:55 PM   #31
Site Supporter




Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Canberra, Australia
Posts: 401
I can't help but wonder if the OP got himself a stash of popcorn, settled into a comfy chair, and pressed the 'post' button.

PF certainly didn't disappoint

10-02-2014, 09:08 PM   #32
Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Fairbanks, AK
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 944
Original Poster
It's entirely possible. Even probable. I thought I knew what people were going to say when I posted it, but there are some surprises in this thread.

A lot of it does, rightly, come down to costs for amateurs. Medium format is unquestionably more expensive, and if budget is a concern that will certainly hamper buying a ton of gear if you start investing in a MF system. Of course, how many lenses does one actually need vs wanting a collection of glass that never gets used... and really that seems to be what it comes down to in the end (costs of a working system, vs the ability to collect an excess of lenses). It feels like most people are looking for another piece of equipment to collect with a FF camera rather than it being a needed tool! "I have all of these lenses, I wish I had another toy to use them on!"

I'm reminded of a conversation I had with a grad student who was pursuing his MFA in print making while I was finishing my undergrad. I had developed a now unfairly stunted love of lithography and started exploring the costs of setting up a decent sized litho press at home (still a dream of mine). I looked up the pricing on a new Takach press similar to the ones we had in the studio, and the price of $20k+ blew me away. I remarked to him that I couldn't imagine ever spending new car money on a press. His exact reply I no longer remember, but basically it was about priorities; the committed artist finds a way to get the tools he or she needs to make their art, cost be damned.
10-03-2014, 03:03 AM   #33
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Southern Indiana
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 14,932
QuoteOriginally posted by ElJamoquio Quote
645z has worse low light performance with available lenses. Less-shallow DOF. It's also boatloads more expensive.

The DA 25mm 645 lens is $5k.
The Canon 24mm TS-E is faster, larger image circle than the newer DA 25mm, same image circle as the older DA 25mm, adds tilt and shift, and is ~$2k.

It's not even diminishing returns, it's paying more for less in a lot of areas.

All else the same, 645 will win in terms of sharpness. In practice (but not theory) the viewfinders are nicer for 645.

So, do I want to pay $20k for a system or $5-10k for a system that will do a lot more?
I'm not sure I understand about the 24mm having a larger image circle than the DA 25. Isn't the medium format sensor 1.3x bigger?

Digital medium format is a niche item. The 645z is a pretty awesome camera. For the stuff people use it for (landscape, studio work), having really wide aperture lenses is not an advantage as it increases the size of the lens, but you will be shooting stopped down most of the time. If you are doing sports photography, or even wildlife, it probably isn't the right format for that sort of work.

I don't forsee the day when medium format will ever be the format of the masses, even though cost of sensors might come down, it still is both over-kill and under-kill for what many people need.
10-03-2014, 04:36 AM - 1 Like   #34
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 23,720
QuoteOriginally posted by skierd Quote
It's entirely possible. Even probable. I thought I knew what people were going to say when I posted it, but there are some surprises in this thread.

A lot of it does, rightly, come down to costs for amateurs. Medium format is unquestionably more expensive, and if budget is a concern that will certainly hamper buying a ton of gear if you start investing in a MF system. Of course, how many lenses does one actually need vs wanting a collection of glass that never gets used... and really that seems to be what it comes down to in the end (costs of a working system, vs the ability to collect an excess of lenses). It feels like most people are looking for another piece of equipment to collect with a FF camera rather than it being a needed tool! "I have all of these lenses, I wish I had another toy to use them on!"

I'm reminded of a conversation I had with a grad student who was pursuing his MFA in print making while I was finishing my undergrad. I had developed a now unfairly stunted love of lithography and started exploring the costs of setting up a decent sized litho press at home (still a dream of mine). I looked up the pricing on a new Takach press similar to the ones we had in the studio, and the price of $20k+ blew me away. I remarked to him that I couldn't imagine ever spending new car money on a press. His exact reply I no longer remember, but basically it was about priorities; the committed artist finds a way to get the tools he or she needs to make their art, cost be damned.
And I agree with that totally. If I really though a 645z wold help me out my photography , I'd borrow against my house and buy one tomorrow. The problem is, much of my photography does not depend on high resolution or narrow DoF. And as pointed out in another thread, 16 Mp is actually quite a lot of resolution, probably 4 Mp mrs than I ever really need.

Images like this don't need high resolution, only a good up sampling software, I'd print this 300 dpi to billboard size and it would look good..


Nor does this one


Resolution is simply not part of the appeal of these types of images.

For images like this... an FF or MF can't touch it, without really expensive (and more important for most of us, really heavy) glass. And yes, weight can make a system impossible to use in some situations.


Every system has it's compromises. Every system has it's strengths. A lot of people have too much stuff, at some point you have to differentiate, who are the collectors, who are the photographers. The fact that someone, anyone, prefers one system over another is pretty much irrelevant to the average reader. What's important is "why would I buy one system over another." My personal photography "all stars" all shot 8x10 film. One of them drove around n a van with his equipment and back drops in the back, and would drive around looking for interesting people to take pictures of. When he found one, his assistants including a makeup artist would hop out of the van, set up the backdrop and reflectors, and he'd take an image. For the average shooter, that would be crazy. I love his work, but I have no desire to work in his genre. What another person likes, even a person who's work you admire, isn't always what's right for you.

So to me the answer to the question is really simple.

Buy FF for shallow DoF, with expensive fast glass. That's where it can't be beat.
Other positives include low light performance on some sensors, dynamic range, on some sensors, and better than APS_c resolution on some sensors... but the only factor common to all FF systems is the ability to produce narrow DoF.

If resolution is paramount you want a 645z. If portability is important you want 4/3 or APS-c.BUt FF might be the best compromise for any given person looking at all those parameters. It doesn't mean one system is better , or worse. It's all about what system is right for you.

It's so simple I don't see why it even generates discussion.


Last edited by normhead; 10-03-2014 at 04:51 AM.
10-03-2014, 10:20 AM   #35
Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Fairbanks, AK
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 944
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Rondec Quote
I'm not sure I understand about the 24mm having a larger image circle than the DA 25. Isn't the medium format sensor 1.3x bigger?
He's referring to the tilt-shift type lenses. They do cover a larger image circle because you have the ability to move the front element around in relation to the film plane, so the image circle has to be larger to cover the sensor over the range of movements.
10-03-2014, 11:17 AM   #36
Site Supporter




Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,892
Yup. You can go one of two ways with the shift, either covering a 62mm by 24mm image circle or a 50 by 36 image circle. The former is a 66.5mm diameter, the latter is 61.6mm. I think the specification for the lens is a 63mm image circle.

In contrast the newer 25mm is 55mm image circle, although the vignetting appears to be from the new hood. The older one, if memory serves, is a 69mm image circle.
10-03-2014, 04:43 PM   #37
Site Supporter
Clinton's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Salt Lake City, UT
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,800
It's simple.

I've done the cost analysis of moving from our pair of K mount cameras to a single 645z with assorted lenses. If I go used, and shop carefully, it's $35,000.

When all is said and done, I will have less versatility, and a higher risk of having to replace my body with another $10k body every 3 years.

So, I hope for a Full Frame K mount that's sub $4k
10-03-2014, 06:21 PM   #38
Veteran Member




Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Maine
Posts: 331
This thread just begs for this video to make an appearance!



10-03-2014, 06:45 PM   #39
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Southern Indiana
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 14,932
QuoteOriginally posted by ElJamoquio Quote
Yup. You can go one of two ways with the shift, either covering a 62mm by 24mm image circle or a 50 by 36 image circle. The former is a 66.5mm diameter, the latter is 61.6mm. I think the specification for the lens is a 63mm image circle.

In contrast the newer 25mm is 55mm image circle, although the vignetting appears to be from the new hood. The older one, if memory serves, is a 69mm image circle.
OK. I think I understand.

Obviously difference in price has more to do with differences in units moved. While the Canon is not a large seller, it certainly sells a large number more than the new medium format DA lenses.
10-03-2014, 07:33 PM   #40
Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Fairbanks, AK
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 944
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Clinton Quote
It's simple.

I've done the cost analysis of moving from our pair of K mount cameras to a single 645z with assorted lenses. If I go used, and shop carefully, it's $35,000.

When all is said and done, I will have less versatility, and a higher risk of having to replace my body with another $10k body every 3 years.

So, I hope for a Full Frame K mount that's sub $4k
Devil's Advocate time.

Yes, if you go to B&H and add the 645Z and ever damn lens across all the focal ranges available to your cart, you'll hit $35k.

So I put the same kind of kit together, actually similar to what you have in your sig, around a K-3. DA* tele primes, DA* 50-135 and 60-250, a few limited primes (77, 40, 15), and a few zooms (sigma 18-35, DA 20-40, tamron 70-200) and a couple fun lenses (DA* 55, Sigma fisheye, 30mm Art, 100 Macro) and I'm sitting at $22k.

Is the 645 50% "better" than the K-3?

Even a smaller but very solid k-3 kit, building from scratch and fun prime heavy kit: FA 77 1.8, DA*55 1.4, DFA 100 Macro, DA 15, DA 40, Sigma 30mm, two zooms for flexibility the DA 20-40,Tamron 70-200 2.8, and pentax HD 1.4 AF tele for extra reach is $8200.

A more-than-basic 645Z kit that would make me extremely happy: FA 75, DFA 55 AW, FA 35, FA 120 Macro, FA 150-300. Sitting at just over $16k with a Z. If I go to a 645D just to get in to a MF system, it's just under $13k.

Harder question... is the 645Z 100% better? Is the 645D 75% better?

How about a standard FF setup from a competitor? Nikon D750, nikkor 24-70 2.8 & 70-200 2.8, 105 Micro, 85 1.4, Sigma 35mm 1.4, and a Tokina 16-28 2.8... only $11k! Hmmm... maybe the Z isn't so expensive after all?

Hell, Hassy, Mayima, and Phase One bodies are all more expensive than just about any of those kits lol.
12-02-2014, 02:25 PM   #41
Site Supporter




Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 888
QuoteOriginally posted by skierd Quote
I'm not getting all of the clamor and whining over Pentax not producing a FF camera. Pentax already makes a superior alternative in the 645D and 645Z, why not embrace it and the brands great DX bodies instead of moaning about a product that may or may not ever come to fruition because it just isn't necessary? The brand has a serious enthusiast/semi-pro camera in the K-3 and a truly affordable professional's MF system in the 645Z. Oh so there's a gap between one of the best DX camera's and the MF system... big whoop.

I swear people on here would complain about a cloudy day then bitch that the sun being too bright when it clears up. I'm not a big poster here at all but all of this drivel about Pentax being doomed by not following the herd (except for Fuji, which is doing just fine it seems with their DX cameras) is making me not want to read or participate on this site anymore, which sucks because there's some talented people here.
Dude, check market shares of FF vs MF. They will be like 99:1. FF rocks and APS-C is behind in size. MF is too large, too expensive, too big for most people. FF is the affordabel, portable format.
12-02-2014, 03:24 PM   #42
Veteran Member
patarok's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 351
completely agree. PENTAX FF will defenitely rock. And the lenses i saw at photokina are so huge in diameter and everything else. it is inevitable...
Think about Sony ... next A7 revamp will hit the stage in a few months.... PENTAX full frame will be there and it will come BIG.
12-02-2014, 04:04 PM - 1 Like   #43
Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Fairbanks, AK
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 944
Original Poster
Dude, check the market share of iPhones vs dslrs. They'll be like 999:1. Dslrs are too bulky, heavy, and complicated for most people. It's obvious that iPhones are the true affordable portable format.
12-02-2014, 09:14 PM   #44
Site Supporter




Join Date: May 2014
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 1,182
QuoteOriginally posted by brelip Quote
I agree with everyone here. But I also think FF is over hyped.


It's like buying a 30K stereo. After a while your ears get used to it and you want something more. Better to learn how to take good pictures and keep that $2500 in the Bank.
12-03-2014, 06:01 PM   #45
Veteran Member
patarok's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 351
I think what one wanted to say was the real portable format for photographers... Does your iphone have opt. zoom? no. does your iPhone do shots with shallow depth of field? no. what about object separation? no. That is a whole other thing. Yeah. and yes there where other formats then mid format films and 35mm, but serious photography has always been done on "plan film"(thats the german term, for what i don't remember the right english word now...), mid format, or 35mm.
If you think of photography and photographs as a "media" in the sense of what a media really is, that transports also a spirit for photography and somehow a sense for angles, views, object separation and composition overall, than you might have to consider your improvident patter and realize, that FF is the real deal for photographers...
The APS-C format was just a compromise for pentax in the beginning of all this digital hype(remember the doom of minolta). But now i think, it is time to go on, since the sensor technology grew up.
And it is all about why FF over MF... and in comparison to MF, FF IS a portable format for serious photographers. (i don't know one iPhone that has a MF sensor, though I know some accessory, that gets you close to real MF photography with your beloved iPhone. (Google is your friend!) ;>
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!
24x36mm, 645z, aps-c, autofocus, bodies, camera, cameras, circle, crop, d700, da, dx, ff, flash, frame, fuji, full-frame, generation, k3, lens, lenses, lot, mf, models, pentax, people, system
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Scanned film or FF / distal MF adwb Film Processing, Scanning, and Darkroom 8 08-17-2014 12:41 PM
Can a lens increase FF over time? Zafar Iqbal Troubleshooting and Beginner Help 3 07-30-2014 09:56 AM
FF even with MF lens LightMeter Pentax K-r 7 11-19-2011 10:34 PM
MF vs. FF froeschle Pentax News and Rumors 51 11-01-2008 09:19 AM
MF APS = 35mm FF? Nesster Pentax News and Rumors 30 02-15-2008 06:55 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:37 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