[stu65]

Hi everyone,

First of all please accept my apologies if tis question has been asked before, I have looked around in this forum but am still inclined to ask.

I currently have a K100D Super and quite a variety of lenses. I want to take a step up and, prior to hearing about the 645D, was looking at the K7.

So now there's the 645D, quite the step up.

I understand what medium format is, but are there any peculiarities with using it? I have read that shooting with medium format is a more meticulous exercise, more planning etc? Not quite sure what is meant by this?

Obviously its quite a change in direction and a costly one and, am I right in assuming, that all my current glass will be of no use?

The more I read the more I am inclining to be content with the K7. I wish Pentax would update their bodies more regularly - if they had something in the 20mp range (yes I know mp is not everything) i would be very happy to upgrade to it. I have been a Pentax man since my ME Super in the early 80s.

I guess I am wanting to be convinced that the move and cost of going for the 645D would be worth it (then I just need to convince the wife LOL).

Any advice (as simply put as possible) would be very much appreciated.

Thanks
Stu

[Nesster]

the 645D will be / is: bigger, heavier, much more expensive than the K7. You'll need 645 lenses, as the 35mm K mount ones are too small and won't mount or work.

Med format is thought of as more meticulous etc - but this is in part due to the fact that you get fewer shots per roll of film... and the larger film area entails a different learning curve for DOF etc. As the Pentax cameras don't have tilt/shift etc, otherwise, the shooting is straightforward, and with digital, you can go just as crazy as you can with an APS-c camera

[stu65]

the 645D will be / is: bigger, heavier, much more expensive than the K7. You'll need 645 lenses, as the 35mm K mount ones are too small and won't mount or work.

Med format is thought of as more meticulous etc - but this is in part due to the fact that you get fewer shots per roll of film... and the larger film area entails a different learning curve for DOF etc. As the Pentax cameras don't have tilt/shift etc, otherwise, the shooting is straightforward, and with digital, you can go just as crazy as you can with an APS-c camera

Thanks Nesster, certainly more expensive lol. Even selling all the kit I have I'll still fall short. I had a feeling that the "more meticulous" comment related more to film than digital.

Stu

[guidoanselmi]

Why the **** would you a 645D? Seriously? what functionality would you get from a 645D that'd be unique - the shallower dof at higher fstops? the better noise control at lower resolutions? the high resolution?

Unless you're doing advertisements or really large commercial prints, there's no reason to buy the 645D over a regular MF film camera. Get a pentax 67 and have fun. For $1000 USD, you can get a nice 2 lens setup with decent scanner.

[tuco]

One key functionality you'd get with a 645D over the K-7 would be much improved light capturing ability - the essence of photography - in a single shot, no doubt. A pretty desirable feature I'd think.

With auto focus lenses on a 645D, it could be a point and shoot camera too. Apart from composition the camera is capable of doing the rest. Whether you'll get the best shot possible is another matter but you can. I don't think you need to worry about it being a more meticulous exercise in planning compared to a less automated manual focus MF film camera. It is a speed daemon compared to those.