[Aboudd]

Brand loyalty from a pro? Fogeddaboutit! As a pro shooter for 35 years I - and I am sure many others- buy for our budget, needs and performance. I have owned Minolta, Nikon, Canon and Leica in 35MM format, Mamiya, Pentax 67 and Hasselblad in MF (film), Sinar, Calumet and Toyo in large format. I've taken a similar path with digital, changing gear more technology advances make it necessary.
I now use two formats, the Nikon D3s and the Pentax 645D, with which I replaced the D3x. Earlier in this thread someone said that each format has its specific uses, it was true with film and it is even more so with digital. I would not expect to use my Pentax 645D in the same situation that I would need the high ISO/high frame speed D3s. If a viable shift lens was available for the 645D my Nikon would sit in the closet 80% of the time, but it isn't so for those jobs I use Nikon and the PC lenses. Conversely, when I want better detail, in macros and landscapes, the 645D is the clear winner. As to the high megapixel count of upcoming DSLRs, even with a count close to the 645D, which is still in question, they won't have the same output results. Packing more pixels in a smaller amount of real estate, to this point, hasn't yielded the best results, and the lack of an AA filter on the 645D yields sharper RAW images.

So far the 645D has gotten justifiably rave reviews for output and build quality. The question of the camera's survival has more to do with the corporate culture at Ricoh than anything else. If they treat it as a halo product, choose to update it next year, finally get new lenses to the market, enhance their tech support and service, support the brand with more advertising - a better web site would help - it will thrive. If they continue with the current path, I have my doubts. In the meantime I look at it this way. I am getting fantastic files with the same sensor that is in the Leica S2 at less than half the price, with used glass available at a third the cost of an i-Pad and, what does it tell you that Leica produces an adapter to use Pentax glass on the S2? If you think you need a MF digital for field work, I can't think of a better camera than the 645D.

[jackinkc]

Brand loyalty from a pro? Fogeddaboutit! As a pro shooter for 35 years I - and I am sure many others- buy for our budget, needs and performance. I have owned Minolta, Nikon, Canon and Leica in 35MM format, Mamiya, Pentax 67 and Hasselblad in MF (film), Sinar, Calumet and Toyo in large format. I've taken a similar path with digital, changing gear more technology advances make it necessary.
I now use two formats, the Nikon D3s and the Pentax 645D, with which I replaced the D3x. Earlier in this thread someone said that each format has its specific uses, it was true with film and it is even more so with digital. I would not expect to use my Pentax 645D in the same situation that I would need the high ISO/high frame speed D3s. If a viable shift lens was available for the 645D my Nikon would sit in the closet 80% of the time, but it isn't so for those jobs I use Nikon and the PC lenses. Conversely, when I want better detail, in macros and landscapes, the 645D is the clear winner. As to the high megapixel count of upcoming DSLRs, even with a count close to the 645D, which is still in question, they won't have the same output results. Packing more pixels in a smaller amount of real estate, to this point, hasn't yielded the best results, and the lack of an AA filter on the 645D yields sharper RAW images.

So far the 645D has gotten justifiably rave reviews for output and build quality. The question of the camera's survival has more to do with the corporate culture at Ricoh than anything else. If they treat it as a halo product, choose to update it next year, finally get new lenses to the market, enhance their tech support and service, support the brand with more advertising - a better web site would help - it will thrive. If they continue with the current path, I have my doubts. In the meantime I look at it this way. I am getting fantastic files with the same sensor that is in the Leica S2 at less than half the price, with used glass available at a third the cost of an i-Pad and, what does it tell you that Leica produces an adapter to use Pentax glass on the S2? If you think you need a MF digital for field work, I can't think of a better camera than the 645D.

Good morning,here,Aboudd. Your communication is well reasoned and logically presemted. As such it was a treat to read. It can't hurt that you ultimate conclusions are similar to mine.

Through the years I have used too many cameras to name (though I will say my favorite 35 was my Contax RTSIII and my best MF was the Pentax 67) - I owned some and borrowed or rented others, always for special needs. Now, at age 75, I have turned away from film in favor of the dramatically superior results available through digital phogography. When I finsh selling cameras and lenses I will end with three cameras: Sony a900, 24.6mp; Sony a350 (backup) and a Pentax 645D. The Sony cameras will use either Zeiss or Sony G lenses and, except for one lens, the 645D will have a wide range of Pentax glass mounted. The exception here will be a Zeiss Jena, 180mm, f/2.8 Sonnar lens. This one will be used only in the studio or under hightly controlled remote site conditions.

My studio lighting will make use of six monolights, reflectors, snoots, barn doors and soft boxes. My field lighting will be one or two Sigma Super flashes with Fong domes. I use Sigma flashes on both the Sony a series cameras and on the Pentax.

I will not use the 645D for most field work, since at my age it will have to be tripod or monopod mounted.

I am confident that my choice of cameras will permit me to accomplish anything I need to do.

[Yamanobori]

If a viable shift lens was available for the 645D my Nikon would sit in the closet 80% of the time...

Aboudd, I assume the Russian shift lens did not work out. Have you ever thought of using a Hasselblad V lens adapter, a Hasselblad 1.4 PC Mutar, and the Hasselblad 40mm, which it was designed for? It would be about a 60mm on the 645D--actual focus length not crop so a bit longer than normal.

[Aboudd]

I've looked at a couple of alternatives including the Zoerk adapter. The Hasselblad solution would end up costing almost as much as a D3x and would be more cumbersome. My hope was that the Hartblei would be a good alternative. To me the performance was just not up to the Nikon PC lenses, even the older 35 (equivalent in focal length to the Hartblei 45). The other consideration is the length. A 45MM on the 645D is useless for most interiors unless they are grand halls - the 60MM on the Hassy rig even worse. I find that I use the 24PC-E and 28 PC on the Nikon for virtually all interior shots. My architectural clients use the images for web and editorial use, so the large files are not necessary. I did make a nice 34" print from a D3s/28 PC file for a clients office recently and the client was very happy. Would I have preferred a file from the 645D? Of course, but until someone makes a viable shift lens for the Pentax, the Nikon rig is my choice.

[phonoline]

I can only second your thoughts, Aboudd. Tried the Zoerk adapter with the modified 67 45mm lens on my 645D but the focal length just isn't enough. Have you ever tried the old 35mm Takuma 67 lens?

[Yamanobori]

I've looked at a couple of alternatives including the Zoerk adapter. The Hasselblad solution would end up costing almost as much as a D3x and would be more cumbersome. My hope was that the Hartblei would be a good alternative. To me the performance was just not up to the Nikon PC lenses, even the older 35 (equivalent in focal length to the Hartblei 45). The other consideration is the length. A 45MM on the 645D is useless for most interiors unless they are grand halls - the 60MM on the Hassy rig even worse. I find that I use the 24PC-E and 28 PC on the Nikon for virtually all interior shots. My architectural clients use the images for web and editorial use, so the large files are not necessary. I did make a nice 34" print from a D3s/28 PC file for a clients office recently and the client was very happy. Would I have preferred a file from the 645D? Of course, but until someone makes a viable shift lens for the Pentax, the Nikon rig is my choice.

I don't really need perspective control, but have you tried doing this in post processing in Photoshop? I wonder if the added quality of the 645D files would compensate for any loss in the process. I do a lot of stitching for panoramas and I will be blown if I can see any loss of detail in the process.

[bull drinkwater]

well if everyone waits for 2 or 3 yrs to wait and see, then it won't be around.i have 4 lenses only one autofocus.hell i spent from 1957 to 2000 with manual focus, so did most of you older guys,so what's the big deal?
i am 73 yrs. old, i bought mine because i wanted one real special camera for my bucket list ,and i could afford it.with a few arm curles i can extend it's range of use.

[ACH DIGITAL]

I wonder what you guys think of this idea: In my early photo days i worked with a Dutch photographer who did still live with a Cambo and architectural black and white (T-Max100) with a Hasselblad SWC 38mm Biogon. He would always shoot leveling the camera, stepping backwards a few yards, so he'd capture the whole building or room with out tilting the camera. Then in the enlarger he'd cropped whatever extra space he didn't need and still get a great huge print with lotsss of details.. I once asked him why he didn't take the Cambo and he told me that with T-Max100 and the Biogon lens he was getting enough detail to do his job a lot faster than using a 4x5.
Having said that; what about using the 645D with the 25mm lens without tilting the camera and cropping afterwards.. Still getting about 30 megapixel from a big CCD which is enough for most architectural work.. or the 35mm for interiors working the same mode..
So what do you think?

[rmlewis]

I wonder what you guys think of this idea: In my early photo days i worked with a Dutch photographer who did still live with a Cambo and architectural black and white (T-Max100) with a Hasselblad SWC 38mm Biogon. He would always shoot leveling the camera, stepping backwards a few yards, so he'd capture the whole building or room with out tilting the camera. Then in the enlarger he'd cropped whatever extra space he didn't need and still get a great huge print with lotsss of details.. I once asked him why he didn't take the Cambo and he told me that with T-Max100 and the Biogon lens he was getting enough detail to do his job a lot faster than using a 4x5.
Having said that; what about using the 645D with the 25mm lens without tilting the camera and cropping afterwards.. Still getting about 30 megapixel from a big CCD which is enough for most architectural work.. or the 35mm for interiors working the same mode..
So what do you think?

It's a good idea but sometimes, particularly indoors, theres not the room to step back

[chicagonature]

It's not all about the numbers though, but also to do with the size of the sensor. Plenty of rumours about a higher spec Canon 5D mk III and yet Canon haven't made any announcements regarding it.

I think that the rumour is pie in the sky. Nikon won't have a D700 replacement treble it's resolution, because it doesn't need to do that. It hasn't tried to match the 5D II which is it's direct competition. I also don't think that they will have a camera half the price of the D3X with 50% more resolution. That willl never happen. beware the online rumours. They are notoriously unreliable.

My guess? They will use a similar sensor to the one in the D3X in the D800 between 20 and 25 mp. Canon are rumoured to be going for between 24 and 32mp. nikon has never really tried to compete on numbers alone, they have competed mainly on low light and focussing.

Besides which if it was just about the number of pixels you would never have medium format in the first place.

I hate to say, "I told you so!" Actually, I don't hate it at all!

36 megapixels! Ah, yes!

[itshimitis]

I hate to say, "I told you so!" Actually, I don't hate it at all!

36 megapixels! Ah, yes!

Congratulations. Happy? It still won't make people give up the Hasselblad H4-31. As I said it's not all about numbers. Nikon have I believe reduced the quality of the sensor to fit the 36 megapixels, and this will particularly affect ISO range which has been reduced. Fitting more photosites on a smaller sensor also increases it's signal to noise ratio. So not only will it have lower ISO it will likely handle noise less well than its predecessor. Sounds like one hell of an achievement! So what they have done is to turn a good pro level camera and make it more commercial, which won't make it more professional.

I repeat - it's not the number of megapixels that matters but how they are handling them. Nikon have handicapped it to stop people buying it instead of the D4.

So not necessarily very much to crow about - you'll be able to print bigger but that's not the only equation when it comes to quality. Oh and by crowing you come over as an arse.

[Anvh]

Ricoh is known for their copying devices and the 645D might actually be an addition to that so i doubt Ricoh will drop it, it's actually more likely they will put more resources in it.

[Bigvern1263]

I am in the market for one of these 645D cameras, and sat up today when i saw this Nikon release, it has made me do a double take, i have followed this forum for a while and taken on board all the info in regards to this 645D, i might just hold off and see what happens. Reason for going the 645D is i want to print large and have just bought a LF printer (44 inch) want some 40 x40 or so prints for home and friends etc.
Thanks for all the info so far on tis forum, has been very informative.

[phonoline]

I use Nikon, too, (D700) and will have a look at the D800E today. I highly doubt it can beat the image quality of the 645D but it could be a nice addition to my equipment, esp. for wedding photography (a field I don't use the 645D for). 4 pics/s is pretty grand at 36MP. And even if it'd just be 24MP
I gotta agree with itshimitis, though. It's not all about pixels. Heck, I just bought a Fuji GX680III.

[Rainer Dynszis]

Of course Nikon's D800 has a much higher pixel density (i.e. pixel per square inch) than Pentax' 645D.

On the other hand, Pentax's own K-5 has also a much higher pixel density than the 645D. Does that affect the K-5's picture quality on a per-pixel basis? No, the 645D has only more megapixels, its pixel quality is, if anything, worse:

If you look at DXOmark.com, you will find that the K-5 produces actually less noise than the 645D at its lowest ISO setting, but more dynamic range, more tonal range, more color sensitivity per pixel.

Ergo, if one could retain the per-pixel quality of the K-5 and increase the sensor's pixel count by simply putting the same pixels on a full format area, then the resulting sensor would be better than that of the 645D.

From what we know at this time, we cannot rule out that the sensor encased in the D800 is exactly that.