[kuau]

Yeah I know the "title" is strange,
yet...
I am curious to see on this forum, why we went out and spent the 10K USD on a MFD camera.

I know why I did, Landscape shooter, and wanted to do big prints.
When The 645D was announced months ago in Japan, Pentax touted the camera as an excellent Landscape camera, which I am not saying it's not, I think it has the potential to be really good.

I hate to beat a dead horse but I hope Pentax/Hoya releases some new lenses soon for this camera, or in my opinion the 645D will be a flop.

Besides private parties, finding FA lens here in the USA is almost impossible, and then if you can find them like I have mentioned in other posts here on this site, it's a total crap shoot.

I am about ready to send in my 45mm FA to Pentax USA which will then be forwarded to Pentax Japan, or at least that's what i was told to see if they can "adjust the lens.
It will probably take 4-6 weeks.

And because I never learn my lesson I purchased off of bay the other day the FA 45-85mm zoom. A total gamble..

Steven

[enoeske]

I'm trying to get my employer to purchase one. I was just working on a big tradeshow banner for them where they wanted 75in tall model images printed at 125 dpi resolution. That would be more than 9000 pixels tall! Our Canon 1Ds mII can almost hit 5000 on the long side, but take into account cropping and our typical shot is around 3000px tall.

We need a medium format.

[Warped]

Wanting to upgrade go full-frame for better resolution and larger prints for exhibiting.
To do so would have meant a change to Canon or Nikon and a reasonable amount of cash to go with a 1D or D3 variant, plus lenses, batteries .....etc.
With the 645D being not that much more in cost, but a lot better in size/resolution it wasn't a hard decision for me.
I've shot with good quality film gear in the past - but kids, mortgage, single income supporting a family ....etc I've been doing things on a shoe-strig budget when it came to digital gear.
The stars aligned for a re-finance of things and the chance to upgrade, so if I was going to do it, I was determined to do it once and do it properly and not get trapped into an upgrade cycle like many others I know.
Now that I've got the 645D, any lusting after other cameras has completely disappeared - all I want is another lens or two and I can't see me wanting/needing another digital camera body of any type for a very long time.

[Tim Wilson]

I did it for these reasons:

1
I'm continually trying to get closer to the quality of "presence" I was able to achieve many years ago working on my MFA thesis, shooting found cultural vignettes on 4x5 color neg film, and making 20x24" C-prints. Only now I want to achieve that working digitally, without always needing a tripod, and targeting prints in the 24x32" range. The 5D2 is capable of that sense, but not at that size.

2
I very much prefer working with 4:3 composition than with 3:2.

3
There's assignment work I get occasionally that would benefit materially from larger files.


Tim Wilson
Chicago

[kuau]

Interesting that I have not seen any landscape photographers chime in
Tim I agree with you I much prefer 4:3 over 3:2
Not that I had the money and also being a leica m9 owner the S2 was our of the question for me because it's a 3;2 camera
Though at least leica has release 3-4 new lenses for the s2
I wish pentax would di the same

Steven

[Thomas]

I shoot mostly landscapes and have been happy working with film since there has been no digital camera I could justify purchasing that produced similar qualities (IMHO, no film vs. digital intent). Film is becoming more difficult however, especially air travel, so I have considered a switch to digital. I have a fairly complete set of lenses for the Pentax 67 and several lenses for the 645, so the 645D was a logical move for me into digital. Alternatives considered were: Nikon D3x + lenses; Canon 5D + lenses or Sony A850 + lenses. In each of those cases total cost would be equal to, or in excess of, the cost of a 645D and I would lose resolution (although each of those choices has advantages over the 645D). In my comparisons so far, the 645D produces files on par with those a good 67 film scan. For me, it appears to have been a good choice. The ease and advantages of digital and the quality I got from my Pentax 67II.

[kuau]

Thomas,
Overall do you feel the 67 lens give better results on the 645D then the 645FA lenses?
I am just kind of bummed out that Pentax releases well at least IMHO the best MFD camera for landscape photo work, excluding buying a phase back and a tech view camera, and by most part the lens just don't cut it.

I always read when purchasing a camera buy for the lenses first then the body, yet in this case it backwards. Pentax has got the camera now, but lacks the lenses for this format??

Then I just took a look at Imaging Resource Interview: John Carlson, Pentax Imaging
Not really sure what Pentax is doing, well of course besides trying to make money,
They call themselves a "lens company" first and foremost. Well lets get some lens out.

Steven

[eddie1960]

Thomas,


I always read when purchasing a camera buy for the lenses first then the body, yet in this case it backwards. Pentax has got the camera now, but lacks the lenses for this format??

Then I just took a look at Imaging Resource Interview: John Carlson, Pentax Imaging
Not really sure what Pentax is doing, well of course besides trying to make money,
They call themselves a "lens company" first and foremost. Well lets get some lens out.

Steven

I think Hoya figured the initial buyers would be the long standing base of 645/67 users who had lenses and they were surprised by the initial success and are now struggling to make up the ground. I would expect some lenses at some point this year for both the 645 and the apsc models
Wish I could afford the 645 myself but currently just can't justify it.
I wouldn't mind seeing at least one pro dealer rent it as well, but that won't happen without lenses ( the mamiya/phase cameras are easy to rent in Toronto, the Hassy as well. the dealer selling them and renting them doesn't even list the 645d on their website for sale and the instore on the other cameras at the flagship store is pathetic (the showcase had no cameras and 2 lenses a week before christmas)

[Thomas]

Then I just took a look at Imaging Resource Interview: John Carlson, Pentax Imaging
Not really sure what Pentax is doing, well of course besides trying to make money,
They call themselves a "lens company" first and foremost. Well lets get some lens out.

Well, one of my concerns is that the old Pentax was a lens company, I'm not so sure about Hoya Pentax. If the camera is successful, as it appears to be, I'm sure new lenses will follow. Hoya may not have any special interest in producing DSLRs, but they do in profits.
I’m not sure which MFDB maker will have better lenses, other than Leica. You mentioned the S2 and although Leica has announced a few lenses, none is available as far as I know, not to mention that two S2 lenses will cost more than the 645D. Lloyd Chambers likes the sensor in the 645D better than that in the S2; he also liked the new 55mm as long as he was shooting landscape type shots; it was only when he got to the mosaic church that he started to grumble.

I haven’t had a chance to test all my lenses. The 67 300mm ED is outstanding (even with the 1.4x) and the 45mm and 90 hold promise. However, I’m comparing to what I get from 67 film scans with the same lenses, not an M9. The 67 lenses are much larger and heavier and lack AF (which I’m beginning to appreciate).

I’m surprised to hear about any problems with the 35mm FA (I don’t have one). They have been rare and expensive for years as many photographers were using them as a shift lens with a Zoerk adapter on Canon bodies. At this point I’m happy with the 45-85 FA, the 75 FA and the 120 FA (and A). The 200mm A is ok. I have a few more to test and each requires sorting out any focus issues.

[surfotog]

Thomas,

As someone sitting on the sideline waiting, I'm really happy( though not surprised) to hear about the performance of the 67 300/4 ED IF on the 645D. My primary interest in the 645D is to use it with the 67 EDIF telephoto lenses. I'm still shooting B&W film with the 67II.
How does manual focus on the 645D compare to the 67II? One of the great things about the 67II is it's viewfinder, which together with the appropriate focus screen, makes manual focus, even with the 800/6.7 EDiF &1.4x converter quite easy.

[Thomas]

Thomas,

As someone sitting on the sideline waiting, I'm really happy( though not surprised) to hear about the performance of the 67 300/4 ED IF on the 645D. My primary interest in the 645D is to use it with the 67 EDIF telephoto lenses. I'm still shooting B&W film with the 67II.
How does manual focus on the 645D compare to the 67II? One of the great things about the 67II is it's viewfinder, which together with the appropriate focus screen, makes manual focus, even with the 800/6.7 EDiF &1.4x converter quite easy.

So you have the 800mm ED; I’d love to see one of those. It must be quite the task to haul around and set up. Do you use two tripods? That’s a lens the old Pentax would make. I can’t imagine they actually sold enough to make money on that lens; they made it because they could.
Focusing is more difficult on the 645D compared to the 67II (maybe not the 67) and the 645N (no microprism), but I don’t notice it really. I just use an iterative process, back and forth until I locate the focus.
I’m sure you’d love the 645D. I certainly don't miss the shutter issues of the 67 with long lenses at slow speeds. I really like the files from the camera, they have a smoothness that is very nice.

[surfotog]

Thomas,

The 800 ED and equipment is indeed quite a task to haul around. I use it primarily to photograph the ocean. It's supported by a wooden Berlebach Uni tripod (17lbs.) and mounted on a Wimberly head. Because I'm following moving objects (waves) two tripods would be impossible. I need at least 1/500 to freeze the action of the water. With this settup I have no trouble getting sharp, shake- free images if I can nail the focus ( no easy feat).
I'd really like someone to compare 30" x 40" B&W prints from 6x7 Acros and a 645D file.

[Thomas]

Thomas,

The 800 ED and equipment is indeed quite a task to haul around. I use it primarily to photograph the ocean. It's supported by a wooden Berlebach Uni tripod (17lbs.) and mounted on a Wimberly head. Because I'm following moving objects (waves) two tripods would be impossible. I need at least 1/500 to freeze the action of the water. With this settup I have no trouble getting sharp, shake- free images if I can nail the focus ( no easy feat).
I'd really like someone to compare 30" x 40" B&W prints from 6x7 Acros and a 645D file.

I'd be happy to send you a 645D DNG file taken with the 300. However, I don't know how to send a file that large, so if someone could offer some instruction, it would be appreciated. Otherwise, I'll send a CD, if you pm your address.

[leping]

I'd be happy to send you a 645D DNG file taken with the 300. However, I don't know how to send a file that large, so if someone could offer some instruction, it would be appreciated. Otherwise, I'll send a CD, if you pm your address.

You can use Dropbox.com to transfer large files easily.

[Thomas]

You can use Dropbox.com to transfer large files easily.

Thanks Leping.