[gurtch]

This image looks quite good to me. I downloaded the full res (44mb) image. I have been hoping to pick up a 35mm A or FA lens (if I can ever find one), and would like to see more shots with this lens on the 645D.

Gary

I have been in Arizona for 3 weeks, and leave tomorrow to return home to NJ. We live on a barrier island, and I do seascapes. I have a 645D, and also have a 35mm A manual focus lens. I will use it on my return, to do some typical seascapes, and post results. I am hoping for decent results, but am anxious to see the 25mm f4 in the works from Pentax. Stay tuned....
Dave
www.modernpictorials.com

[sergiolov]

First of all, let me say that I am new to the forum, and came here becouse I am waiting for a 645d. In the last weeks i purchased a complete set of lenses, including a FA 35.
To have an idea of performance, I mounted it on a Panasonic G1 which, with a 12 MP micro 4/3 sensor, creates an equivalent sensor of approx. 82 MP for the lens.
below is a 100% crop ( shot was with full open full 3,5 aperture) that shows complete sharpness at pixel level. The house is
200 meters away. The crop is from a 3,2 x 2,4 meters equivalent in a 44x33 mm sensor of 82 MP.
Sergio

[sergiolov]

the total image, taken on film with the lens on 645n
Sergio

[chicagonature]

HOW ABOUT DOING AN ACTUAL COMPARISON TEST:
Would someone in the Chicago area with a Pentax 645D would like to do a test with me? We could meet up and take the exact same shots with the same lens(es). I'll process the transparency film at my regular lab, scan the film, and we'll compare results. That should set the record straight!

Addressing some other stuff written above:

FOCUS STACKING:
Focus stacking is not something that works for my kind of landscapes where things are moving and images that need to be as large as 40x56", especially prairies with flowers that are 20 inches from the image plane. Great in theory, but not in practice for these kinds of subjects. To get an idea of my work, see the Chicago print collection at www.ChicagoNature.com.

HYPERFOCAL DISTANCE:
Remember, I focus at the hyperfocal distance, not a test chart of a specific subject. I simply double the distance to the nearest subject in the frame, set the lens to that distance, set the aperture, and shoot. I'm definitely shooting at f22 to f32 on my 645NII and the large prints loko great. That would equate to f18 to f25 on the 645D. So, that's why I'm looking for a real comparison between film and digital capture in terms of shooting landscapes with great detail at f22 focusing at the hyperfocal distance. All I know is that my film shots at f32 may not be perfectly sharp at every part of the frame sharp due to diffraction, but they look pretty darned good scanned at 4000dpi on my Nikon LS9000 scanner. Then, after a minor amount of Photoshop magic and proper sharpening, they look even better and can be reproduce very large.

So, the theory says that digital capture can't hold a candle to film capture for landscapes shot at small apertures. But, what is the reality.

Mike